


‘a lets ee 


Zra aNicistcrenitlel 
| ees he i 





222. 1 gad 9 2640. 
THE AVERA 


Bible Collection. 


eae A av 


Library of Trinity College, 


ae 


DURHAM, N. C, 


a ee nd ee 


= 
NN 
_— 
7a) 
co 
= 


t 
Received UR 


gy Sart Re 


“s 


DUKE 
UNIVERSITY 


DIVINITY SCHOOL 
LIBRARY 

















ses ; hos SS $y ok te oS) SERB 
“WW hed eee ve. exe yd SALE AL we Pye 15 ets Od 
» ‘+. ; at Ry “ 








THE CENTURY BIBLE 


Vow Complete 


GENESIS, by the Rev. Prof. W. H. Bennett, Litt.D., D.D. 

EXODUS, by the Rev. Prof. W. H. Bennett, Litt.D., D.D. 

Seg ee AnD NUMBERS, by the Rev. Prof, A. R. S. Kennepy, M.A., 

DEUTERONOMY anp JOSHUA, by the Rev. Prof. H. WHEELER 
Rosrnson, M.A. 

JUDGES anp RUTH, by the Rev. Sei G. W. THATCHER, M.A,, B.D. 

I anp II SAMUEL, by the Rev. Prof. A. R. S. Kennepy, M.A., D.D. 

I AnD II KINGS, by the Rev. Principal Skinner, D.D. 

I anv II CHRONICLES, by the Rev. W. HARVEy-JELLIE, M.A., B.D. 

EZRA, NEHEMIAH, Aanp ESTHER, by the Rev. Prof. T. Witton Davies, 
B.A., Ph.D., D.D. 

JOB, by Prof. A, S. Peake, M.A., D.D. 

PSALMS (Vol. I) To LXXII, by the Rev. Prof. Davison, M.A., D.D. 

eS a sada TO END, by the Rev. Prof. T. Wirron DAvtEs, 

-A., Ph.D., D.D. 

PROVERBS, ECCLESIASTES, anp SONG OF SOLOMON, by the 
Rev. G. CURRIE MArtTIn, M.A.,, B.D. 

ISAIAH I-XXXIX, by the Rev. Prof. OWEN C. WHITEHOUSE, M.A., D.D. 

ISAIAH XL-LXVI, by the Rev. Prof. OWen C. WuiTenousE, M.A., D.D. 

JEREMIAH (Vol. 1), by Prof. A. S. PEAKE, M.A., D.D. 

icp (Vol. II), AnD LAMENTATIONS, by Prof, A. S, PEAKE, 


EZEKIEL, by the Rev. Prof. W. F. Lorrnouse, M.A. 

DANIEL, by the Rev. Prof. R. H. CHARLES, D.D. 

MINOR PROPHETS: Hosea, JoEL, AMOS, OBADIAH, JONAH, MICAH, by 
the Rev. R. F. Horton, M.A., D.D. 

MINOR PROPHETS: Nanum, HABAKKUK, ZEPHANIAH, HAGGAI, 
ZECHARIAH, MALACHI, by the Rev. Canon Driver, Litt.D., D.D. 


MATTHEW, by the Rev. Prof. W. F. SLATER, M.A. 

MARK, by the Jate Principal SALMonp, D.D. 

LUKE, by Principal W. F. ADENEY, M.A., D.D. 

JOHN, by the Rev. J. A. M¢Ciymont, D.D. 

ACTS, by the Rev. Prof. J. VERNON BARTLET, M.A., D.D. 

ROMANS, by the Rev. Principal A. E, GARV. M.A., D.D. 

I AnD II CORINTHIANS, by Prof. J. MAssiz, M.A., D.D. 

EPHESIANS, COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, PHILIPPIANS, by the 
Rev, G. CURRIE MARTIN, M.A., B.D. 

I an II THESSALONIANS, GALATIANS, by Principal W. F. ADENEY, 


M.A., D.D. 
THE PASTORAL EPISTLES, by the Rev. R. F. Horton, M.A., D.D. 
HEBREWS, by Prof. A. S. Praxis, M.A., D.D. 
THE GENERAL EPISTLES, by the Rev. Prof. W. H. BBNNETT, Litt.D., 


D.D. 
REVELATION, by the Rev. Prof. C. AnpERson Scorr, M.A., B.D. 





THE NEW-CENTURY BIBLE 


YTI@ARViKU ART OT 


EZRA, NEHEMIAH AND 
ESTHER 














a 


Cy 
A Ta 








N.B.—Some of the Identifications in 


TCLE.C. 3 



































Copyright — Join Barthdlamew & Co. 





map are uncertain, compare notes. 


‘dinbur¢h. 





Esa, WeBemird and 
Esther 


INTRODUCTION 
REVISED VERSION WITH NOTES 
MAPS AND INDEX 


Cc va 
EDITED BY 


REV. T. apace? DAVIES, B.A., Ps.D., D.D. 


OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES, UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF 
sOnTH WALES, BANGOR ; LATE PRINCIPAL MIDLAND 
BAPTIST COLLEGE, NOTTINGHAM 


5243 2 


NEW YORK: HENRY FROWDE 
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, AMERICAN BRANCH 
EDINBURGH; T. ©. & E. C. JACK 





BLRARS WKS 


Ral oa 





sit Abed tt 


> 


Ao, 





EZRA AND NEHEMIAH 


INTRODUCTION 
AND 


REVISED VERSION WITH ANNOTATIONS 





BZRA AND NEHEMIAH 
INTRODUCTION 


I. NAME, PLACE IN CANON, 


EzRA AND NEHEMIAH are treated asone book with the 
name ‘Ezra’ in the Talmud ',the Massorah, in the LX X (B) 
(Esdras (B)), in Josephus”, and in the early Christian 

- Church. Origen in his Hexapla was the first to divide 
_ this one work into two, but the first to give the second part 
the name ‘ Nehemiah’ was Jerome, according to Sayce* 
and Ryle, though Baudissin* says it is due to late MSS. 
of the LXX. 
| In the Jewish Canon, as represented by our Hebrew 
_ Bible, Ezra~-Nehemiah and Chronicles (reckoned as one 
__ book) are the two last books in the third division (Ketubim 
or writings, also called Hagiographa), and therefore in 
_ the Hebrew Old Testament. In the English, Welsh, &c., 
_ Bible, Ezra and Nehemiah, counted as two books, appear 
_ after Samuel; Kings, and Chronicles, and before Esther. 
It is impossible to.say for certain when Ezra-Nehemiah_ 
was received into the Canon of the Old Testament. 
z Ryle® thinks that every book now in the Ketudim must 
- have found its way, into the Jewish Canon between 
_ 160-109 B.C. His evidence for this conclusion is cumula- 
tive, but it is by no means decisive. He does not advance 
_a single argument that settles the matter beyond contro- 
_ versy, nor can the sum total of his arguments be said to 
do this. It cannot be proved definitely that our Hebrew 
_ Bible was recognized as canonical by the Synod of Jamnia 
_ (A.D. 90). By about a. D. 200 the whole of the Hebrew 
_ Bible as we know it must have been recognized as canoni- 


1 Baba Bathra, 154. 2 Contra Ap. i. 8, &c. 
3 Ezra and Nehemiah, p. 28. 4 Einleitung, p. 264. 
_ 5 The Canon of the Old Testament, 1209 ff. 
i é B2 ; 












4 « 





cal, for the Mishnah implies that, and we seem jus ‘ified ix 
believing that in A. D. 200 the Mishnah existed com 
though no documentary witness certifies to the «a 
of a written Mishnah until some centuries later. we 
- Though it is the prevailing opinion among modern — 
scholars, especially since the time of Zunz 4, that originally — 
Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah formed but one continuous 
book, compiled, and in part composed, by one man, named — 
the Chronicler,’ or by more than one belonging to the 
same school, there is not an atom of evidence in ancient — 
Codices, Versions, or Editions, that these three books. 
were counted as one, though there is ample evidence that — 
Ezra-Nehemiah was reckoned as one. See further under 
‘ Sources,’ &c., pp. 12 ff. The duplication of Ezra i. 1-3 
at the close of 2 Chronicles is due toa late editor who 
_ ‘wished to explain when and how the Seuenty years of the 
preceding verse came to an end. 


II. THE CONTENTS OF EZRA-NEHEMIAH. 


The following analysis rests on the general assumption 
that the present order of the chapters and verses in Ezra- 
Nehemiah is in the main at once genuine and authentic, 
though in some of its details the text has suffered at binge 
hands of copyists and editors. Is 

EZRA, ; air Sealy 

«The book of Ezra falls naturally into two sain aibtdionin 
Chaps. i-vi speak of the period from the arrival at Jeru- 
salem of Zerubbabel and Joshua and their fellow exiles’ to 
the.completion and dedication of the Temple, i.e. from 
537 to 516. In chaps. vii-x we have a record of the ar- 
rival from Babylon of Ezra and his caravan, and of the 
work which Ezra did, all comprehended in something 
over a single year(458-457 B.c.). Of the sixty or fifty years 
that elapsed between the events of chaps. vi and vii we 
know practically nothing, though some records of this 
interval must at one time have existed, perhaps imcor- 
porated in the original draft of Ezra-Nehemiah. 


1 Gottes Vortrége®, 28 ff. 





“ INTRODUCTION «> 5 


i-vi. First part of Ezra: from the return to the 
dedication of the Temple, 537-516 B.C. 


~ i. Cyrus, having conquered Babylon, permits the Jewish 
exiles in that country to return to Jerusalem to rebuild 
their Temple and reorganize their religious institutions, 
_ restoring to them the Temple vessels removed by Nebu- 
chadnezzar in 586 B.C. 
ii (1 Esdras v. 7-45). A list of those who accepted 
_ the royal offer, over 40,000 in all. 

iii (1 Esdras v. 47-65). Resumption of the religious 
life of the nation: building and dedication of the Altar 
(1-3) ; observance of Tabernacles and other feasts (4-7) ; 
foundation of the Temple laid (8-13), 537-6 B.C. 

iv. 1-5, 24 (1 Esdras v. 66-73). The Jews refuse the offer 
of the Samaritans to co-operate with them in the work of 
rebuilding the Temple, whereupon the Samaritans stead- 
fastly oppose the work, which therefore remained at a 
standstill from 536 to 516 (twenty years). 

The section iv. 7-23 (1 Esdras ii. 15-25) (ver. 6 is an 
interpolation, see note on) belongs to the history of the 
building of the walls, and has its right place between 
Ezra i and Neh. i, or (Torrey, Kent) after Neh. vi. 

v. 1f (1% Esdras vi. 1 f). The building of the Temple re- 
sumed through the “eae a of the prophets Haggai and 
Zechariah (520 B, C.). 

_ v. 34vi. 12 (1 Esdras vi. 3-34). Unsuccessful opposi- 
tion of the Persian officials to the building (520-15 B-C.). 
- v. 3-5. The Persian officials make inquiries of the 

builders. ° 

v. 6-vi. 12. Correspondence between them and King 
_ Darius resulting in a royal decree authorizing the Jews to 
proceed with the building. 
_ vi. 12-18 (4 Esdras vii.1-11). Completion and dedica- 
tion of the Temple (516 B. c.). 


vi. 19-22 (1 Esdras vii. 12-15). The keeping of the 
Passover. 


_(Longimanus) a commission authorizing the reorganiza-_ 


6 ~~ ‘EZRA AND NEHEMIA 












Second part of Ezra; vii-x (1 Esdras 
Ezra’s arrival at Jerusalem and his 


To these chapters must be added Neh. 
which. describe the activity of Ezra and are 
Nehemiah, though his name has by mistake found its 
into Nehemiah (458-457 (or 456, or 455) B.C.) say im 

Between the time implied at the end of ch. vi and 
beginning of ch. vii there is an interval of about 


what later date. 
vii (I Esdras viii. 1-27). Journey of Ezra and his ane. 
from Babylon to Jerusalem, bringing from Artaxerxes I o. 


a 
tion of Judaism. ato 
viii. 1-14 (t Esdras viii. 28-40). List of those who 1 e 
viii. 15-36 (1 Esdras viii. 41-64 (66)). The assembling of : 
the party by the river Ahava ; incidents of theloenen 5 the 25 
arrival. at 
ix (1 Esdras viii. 68- -9o0). Ezra’s grief on he ari ing 
some Jews were married to foreign wiyes (-5)i 
fession and prayer (6-15). \ 
_ x (1 Esdras viii. 91-ix. 36), Measures shen : 
end to. the mixed marriages. ea 
See also the analysis of Neh. viii. 73>-x i in its. pl: 
under Nehemiah, though this section belonging rictly 
the life of Ezra and, therefore, to the book so called: 
The history of Ezra breaks off suddenly and: of | S € 
we have no certain information: see p.155 fh 8 88 












NEHEMIAH, 

In this book we have a narrative of Nel emia fe 
from the time he received the king’s permission to vis 
his people at Jerusalem (i) to his second visit i 
Ps vii. € , 


In i-vii. 5, with which must probably * 


eel INTRODUCTION 5 EE 7 


by the Germans the ‘I’ sections, as Nehemiah in them 


speaks i in the first person. 
Vii. 73°—x (see on) forms part of the history of Ezra, 


and probably stood originally at the end of the Book of 
‘ Ezra, forming part of that-book. 


i. 1-114», Nehemiah’s grief on hearing of the sad con- 
dition of Jerusalem, and his Prayer. r 

i. 11°-ii. Nehemiah, receiving the king’s permission, 
visits. Jerusalem : his inspection of the walls and_his 
pathetic impressions, 

iil. Names of those who repaired the several parts of 


- the walls. 


iv. Opposition to the work (1-8), and the means em- 
ployed by Nehemiah to overcome it (9-23). 
__v. Social distress through the hard treatment of the poor 
by the rich (1-5) and how Nehemiah remedied it (61 3). 
Nehemiah’s own generosity (14-19). 
_ vi. The walls completed (ver. 15), notwithstanding op- 
position from without (1-9) and treachery within (10-19). 

ii. I-73*+xi. 1 f. and probably, in addition, the rest of 


ch. xi Measures taken for the defence of Jerusalem (vii. 


1=3) and for the increase of its population (vii. 4-xi. 1 ff.). 
vii. 73°-x (less certainly x) belongs to the history of 


_ Ezra, and has its proper place immediately after Ezra x as 


a part of that book: see p. 155 ff. and introductory re- 


marks to vii. 73>. Ezra reads and expounds the law (vii. 


_ 73°=-viii. 8); commands the people to rejoice (viii. 9-11) ; 


Tabernacles observed (viii. 12-18) ; confession and prayer 


- (ix. 1-37); signatures to the covenant made (ix. 38-x. 29); 
_ obligations assumed by the people (x. 10-39). 


xi. I ff. Continuation of the history of Nehemiah. 
xi. 1 f. How the population of Jerusalem is increased. 
xi. 3-xii. 26. Various lists of laymen and Temple, 


officials. 


5 
tS 


Xil. 27-43. Dedication of the walls. Here the first per- 


* son, dropped after vil. 5, is resumed (see verses 31, 38, 40). 


Gee 


xii. 44—xiii. 31 (end). Nehemiah’s second visit to Jeru- 


salem (xiii. 6) his later religious reforms: provision is 







8 EZRA AND NE 


made for the support-of the Levites. (iba. y 
and for the strict observance of the Sabba i 
energetic protest against. mixed marriages ps 
Nehemiah’s closing. words (viii. sof. er Sia! 









Ill. THE BOOK OF THE TORAH, OR THE Ins 
Book BROUGHT, READ, AND EXPOUNDED BY FE 


Before proceeding to a consideration of the sourc 
which Ezra-Nehemiah rests it will be of some service 


brought by Ezra (see Ezra vii. 14). ; Liye: 
No one now believes that the whole of our present 
Hebrew Old Testament was brought together and recog- 
nized as canonical by Ezra and Nehemiah, helped by the 
(fictitious) Great Synagogue (see’on Neh. viii. 2), and per £ 
haps by Malachi, ‘though it was | the prevailing opinion — 
among Jew and Christian in ancient times, and in recent — 
times was vigorously defended by Keil and. ‘Hen co i 
Germany, and by Archibald Alexander and Ww. cre ' ze 
both of Princeton, U.S.A. It is now agreed among 
scholars that many parts of the Old Testam 


os 
not even written for some centuries after a ase 








period. ‘y Siac - 
It uséd to be largely held that Ezra, or ‘one of | re- 


decessors, was the editor of the Hexateuch (Pentate 
Joshua), and that it was a copy of this which 
But Ezra shows little or no interest in the oi 
called prophetic parts of the Hexateuch, or an 
ance with them, It is to the legal portions that E ara and 
Nehemiah hark back, especially to the laws i in Deut. D) 
and Lev. xvii. 17-26 (H). The use of the w ‘ord torah, 
translated ‘law,’ proves nothing in the present « ; cu: sio1 cm 
for though in Rabbinical Hebrew it is the technica ici lterm — 
for the Pentateuch, it never has that sense in 1 i 
Testament, as Delitzsch in the last edition of hi is Co 
mentary on Genesis (1887) admitted, after. oh vin 
viously maintained the contrary. The ‘ae 
ap # 


ct“ 39) 





mer 


- INTRODUCTION~ . 9 
strictly ‘instruction,’? and is generally used of what God 
‘commands through prophets and priests. 

Since the enactments of the P code are comparatively 
seldom cited or implied it is strange that Wellhausen ’, 
Cornill*, and others should hold that Ezra’s forah was 
the P code, though the latter passed through later changes 
and received later additions. It is exceedingly unlikely 
that the P code could have been designated the ‘law of 
Moses’ (Ezra vii. 6, Neh. viii. 1), ‘the law of Yahweh’ 
(Ezra vii. 10), ‘the law of God’ (Ezra vii. 14, Neh. viii. 8, 
&c.), or ‘all the commandments, ordinances, and statutes 
of Yahweh’ (Neh. x. 29). 

Moreover the laws in Ezra-Nehemiah are often different 
from those of P, and belong to an older stratum of the 
national life. The pre-exilic custom of offering one whole 
offering in the morning and one cereal offering in the 
evening is that implied and followed in Neh. x. 34 (33) 
(seeon). The custom enforced in Ezek. xlvi. 13-15 (both 

_ offerings in the morning) and in P (Num. xxviii. 3-8, both 

offerings in the morning and also in the evening). are 

those of a later time. -It must be borne in mind that 

Ezekiel’s code (xI-xlviii) was an ideal, a programme to be 

realized in after times. According to P (Exod. xxx. 13; 
2 Chron, xxiv. 4 f., &c.) the poll-tax for the upkeep of the 
Temple is half a shekel. But the law enforced by Ezra or 

Nehemiah or both makes the tax one-third of a shekel 
(see Neh. x. 32 f., and the note on). 

Ezra ix. 6-15 ee Neh. ix, which have many resem-_ 
blances, are conceived and expressed much in the manner 

of D ; there is nothing of the kind in P. 


1 Professors Sayce, Haupt, and Zimmern (see KAT. © 606, 
note 3) connect the Heb. forah with the Bab. fterfu (= ‘the 
message ofa god”), which in the time of Hammurabi had as~ 
sumed the technical sense of ‘a divinely revealed law,’ as e.g. 
the Hammurabi Rage, The cognate Bab. verb (é#) means 
“to send a message.’ 

_* Proleg. Eng. Ed, 408 ff.; Geschichie, 177 ff. 

$ Introd. rz2 ff.; Germ. Ed. ©) 58 fi. 









fo EZRA AND NEHE! 
"The law of the Sabbatie year in Neh, x 31 
agrees with Exod. xxiii. 10 f. (JB) rather that 
xxv. 2-7 (H). 
For other laws absent from P yet found in older 
and referred to in Ezra~-Nehemiah see on Neh. x. 
and on many other passages in the present volume. | 
Many laws and customs mentioned or implied have no oe 
Counterpart anywhere in the Old Testament : see on Neh. k 
x. 34. = 
If it was the P code that Ezra published and tried to — 
enforce it is strange that so few of its provisions seem to iv 
have been realized, though the argumentum e silentiois 
admittedly a precarious one. The observance of the Feast — 
of Tabernacles is mentioned twice in these books (Ezra 
iii. 4-7, Neh. viii..13-18), both of them falling within the 
scope of Ezra’s activity (see on, Neh.vii. 73°-x). Nehemiah, _ 
otherwise so punctilious about keeping the law, seems to 
have no concernabout the feast. The Passover is mentioned — 
once only in these books, viz. in Ezra vi, 19, but neither — 
Pentecost (the Feast of Weeks) nor the Day of Atonement — 
is even mentioned. Stade! thinks that Ezra’s torah was 
an enlarged edition of the Holiness Code (H, Lev. xvii- — 
xxvi), and Kuenen? says it must have included this code. 
But Geissler in his valuable monograph Die Hierari- 
schen Bezichungen der Ezra-Memoiren (1899) has made 
it abundantly evident that all the Hexateuch sources have 
been drawn upon in Ezra vii-x, and the present writer has 4 
brought together proofs of the same kind relating to the — 
rest of Ezra~Nehemiah, and is prevented by eeigaiche ; 
of space alone from setting them forth here. == 
Ezra’s zorah corresponds neither to our Pentateuch nor ‘4 
to the Hexateuch, and still less to any one of the 1 ; 
nized Hexateuch sources (JE, D, P). It seems to hi 
been a collection of laws agreeing mainly with-the | vs in 
D and H, and, in a less degree, with these in Pp This 
collection was probably made by Ezra himself from 1 he 






4 ioeses 


+ Gesch, ii. 181. * Ges, Abhandlungen (Budde), > 36 5 ; 
oe a> 


\ Sar es, 
tlle 


~ es s 


‘INTRODUCTION ~ er 





_ mass of histories aid codes-brought together in Babylon, 
which at length crystalized into our Hexateuch. 
_ That this code came to be called the ‘ Torah (=Instruc- 
_ tion Book) of Moses’ ( Ezra vii. 6) means no more than 
that it rested upon a nucleus of law which was rightly 
_ascribed to the great Jewish lawgiver himself. As time went 
on and the name ‘ Moses’ gathered about it more and more- 
_ halo it would be natural to associate the whole of the Five 
~ Books with his name, just as the ‘Five Books” of the 
Psalter came to be connected with the name ‘ David,’ the 
Moses of song. Indeed, already in the times with which 
we are dealing, the expression ‘the Zorah of Moses,’ ‘ of 
_ God,’ or ‘ of Yahweh,’ had come to have a somewhat tech- 
nical sense—‘ the Lawbook for the community of Yahweh 
founded by Moses.’- 


IV. THE PRINCIPAL SOURCES OF EZRA-NEHEMIAH. 


Here are to be briefly enumerated the principal mate- 
tials out of which, in the opinion of the present writer, the 
final editor (R, ie. Redactor) wove the existing narrative, 
hot omitting the part contributed by the editor himself. 
It is not necessary in this place to consider the complex 
_code (torah) according to which both Ezra and Nehemiah 
sought to act and to make others act (see § 3). This be- 
came a part of the history which Ezta-Nehemiah contains, 
and is involved in that history. It is quite evident ‘that’ 
é these books are more or less compilations—that they are 
“not homogeneous compositions, This is made quite clear 
by many considerations. 

I. The interchange of the first and third persons when 
Ezra or Nehemiah is the theme of the narrative. In some 
cases the transition from one person to another is very_ 
sudden, as in Ezra ix.15 and x.1; Neh. vii. 5 f. and 7 ff. ; 
‘xii. 26 and 27 ff. ; xiii. I-3 and ete 4 ff. 5 

2. The lack of continuity in the narrative. Between 
Ezra vi. 22 and vii. 1 there is a break in the’ narrative 
representing a period of some sixty years. An editor at 
a later time would not be greatly struck by this gap'when 


12 EZRA. AND. ‘NEE H 






to it Neh. vii. 73?-x ; and many small sections 
viously incomplete, as e. g. that ‘closing with Neh. x 


the pieces joined are sometimes but fragments. 1) Felten eae 

3. Each book displays differences of vocabulary, phras- +i 
ing, and spirit, though this is in an eminent degree true of - 
Ezra with its ‘Aramaic’ and ‘1’ sections. Nothing is _ 
more striking in this connexion than the Aramaic bs 
tions of Ezra. See below. igsae 

4. There are apparent. discrepancies which could hardly 
have existed if the whole had come from one hand. Be- — 
side the variations in identical genealogies (see Ezra il, 
Neh. vii, &c.) compare Ezra iii. 4 ff. and Neh. viii. asa 
18, especially ver. 17. 


‘ 


Rewceition AND DESCRIPTION OF THE PRINCIPAL Sources, 


Note that the designating letter precedes the ‘nape 
of the source, 

T. Temple records, embracing all extant, aces 
relating to the Temple and its officials, but more especi-” 
ally from the return in the time of Cyrus. Such records 
must have been carefully preserved after the restoration of ~ 
the sanctuary, probably i in one of the Temple treasuries 
(see on Ezra viii. 29, x. 6). Ezra i-vi belongs as a whole 
to this source, though the whole has been worked over by 
a Redactor (R), Nothing would be more likely to be 
scrupulously guarded than the official documents, all i in 
Aramaic except i, 2-4, as during the Persian period they 
constituted_a kind of official recognition of the maces 
religion. Ezra iv. 7-23 (see on) belongs to source C, to 
noticed later. 

T,. The Aramaic parts of T. These are in cael 
of sufficient importance to deserve a separate. notice, ; 
They are the following, all of themin Ezra: =e 

I. Correspondence between Persian officials in P, 
tine and Darius I concerning the building of the Bo bs 





"INTRODUCTION © rz 


the purpose of the first named being to hinder the work, 

_iv. 7-v. 12. 

2. Letter of Artaxerxes I to Ezra officially recognizing 

the Jewish religion and its central sanctuary, vii. 12-26. 

We have a similar Aramaic document in iv. 8-22, and 
though this has to do with wa/l- building and is to be sub-- 
sumed under C (Ca, see below) it is convenient to consider 
it in connexion with the above. 

Most recent writers regard these Aramaic sections as 

' genuine though somewhat altered from their original 
form; thus Driver, Cornill (later editions), Strack, Bau- 
dissin, and Budde in their Introductions, Ryle, Siegfried, 
Guthe, and Bertholet in their Commentaries, and ‘also 
y. Hoonacker, Klostermann. 

_ Aramaic seems in the fifth century B.C. to have been _ 
the language of diplomacy between the various courts and 
governments of Western Asia, just as French was in the 

seventeenth and eighteenth centuries A.D. the imgua 
franca of Western Europe. The recently discovered Ara- 
maic papyri give countenance to this, though the proofs 
are not very decisive. As the Aramaic portions of Ezra - 
embrace rather more than the official documents many 
(v. Hoonacker, Driver, Baudissin) have held that there 

_ existed originally an Aramaic history from which the 

parts in Ezra are extracted. 

_ Quite recently! Sir Henry H. Howorth has put forth 

and defended the strange view that Ezra, Nehemiah, 
Esther, Daniel, and other post-exilic books were written 
originally in Aramaic, the Jewish doctors at the Jamnia 
Council (ci7ca A.D. 90) having translated it into the 
Hebrew of the M.T., retaining parts of the original 
Aramaic i in Ezra and Daniel. 

-Since the publication of E. Meyer’s remarkable essay on 
The Rise of Judaism? (not yet put into English notwith 
standing its value and enormous influence) German opinion 
_has become much more favourable to the trustworthiness 


1 PSBA., xxxi. 89-99, 15 
* Die Entstehung des sat Halle, 1896. 












1%. EZRA. AND NEH PH 


_of these Aramaic parts, Graetz, Natd “ke, 
“Kent regard them as pure forgeries of the Ch 
was anxious to win respect and increased dey 
Judaism by representing it as having received in: 


ever, the impression which an unprejudiced meade gives, — 
The language of these documents agrees so closely witl = 
that of the Aramaic papyri as to prove that they belong to 
the same period, viz. the fifth century B. C., though Torrey, - 
in his latest contribution to the subject’, makes a gallant" d 
“but bootless attempt to prove the contrary. Wellhausen — 
pronounces these documents spurious, but he assumes — 
their genuineness when constructing his history of lawnh 
The weightiest objection to the historicity of the Aramaic 
section is their strong Jewish colouring, just as, it is sup- — 
_posed, the Chronicler might be expected to give them, This — 
applies also and, indeed, specially to the Cyrus edict, i. 2-4) 
which Meyer, by a singular inconsistency, holds to be a 
fiction of the Chronicler, But we have to note thesethings : 

1. The Persian king would be sure to have about him 
Jewish officials to advise him when dealing with Palestine 
and its people. 

_-2,. When drawing up edicts or the like in which jeniah ts 
interests were favoured, especially when Jewish requests 
were granted, it is not unreasonable to think that he left 
the wording to Jews, 

3. We know from the history of Persian kings tba they 
were in the habit of associating themselves with the various 
nationalities subject to them in the religions they professed, 
In the well-known clay cylinder of Cyrus (reproduced 53: 
substance in Century Bible, Isa. vol. ii, 342 £.) this | 
though a Persian, speaks of himself as the servant of 
Marduk (Merodak), Babylon’s principal god, and as re- 
storing to their sanctuaries the deities whom Nabonidus _ 
had taken away. We have a yery remarkable example — 


Als 


of this in the Gadatas inscription found in Bcciaia ll ey 


ae” 





Pees 





1 AJSL., April, 1908. - 


ag INTRODUCTION ag 


“ihe, east of ‘Thessaly in 1889, te it Darius, son of 
_ Hystaspes, complains of the way in which the Persian 
governor, Gadatas, had treated the priests of Apollo in 
the above province. He recognizes in Apollo the deity 
who has spoken to his ancestors and helped them. When 

-Cambyses conquered Egypt and made Uzahor, an Egyp- 

tian priest, his chief physician, the latter so wrought on 

the mind of his master that the Persian king gave orders 
_ for the restoration of the cultus and temple of the goddess 

Nit (mother of the Sun-god) at Sais, and accompanied 
the act by many expressions of esteem for that deity ', 

There need not be any insincerity in the language used 
by Cyrus in Ezra i, or in that ascribed to Artaxerxes. in 

Ezra vii. 12-26. All along the Persian is thinking about 

his own Ahura-mazda, called by different people under 

other names and viewed in varying ways, yet all the 
while the same one supreme Good Spirit. That ancient 

Zoroastrianism was capable of taking this philosophical 

view of the religions of the world, of seeing the one in the - 

many, is proved by what we know of it (see p, 40). 

Moreover, there is great probability that the Persians 
were well disposed to Judaism on account of its many 
_affinities with their own religion, as e. g. its high ethical 
spirit, its Dualism, &c, It was the Persian’s lofty con- 
ception of the Supreme Deity that led him to create the 
“conception of a rival spirit to whom was ascribed the evil 
that is in the universe. Moreover the Sachau Aramaic 
_papyri (§§ 13 f.) tell us that when Cambyses, son of Cyrus, — 
campaigned in Egypt he spared the Jewish temple at Yeb, 
though he destroyed the sanctuaries of the Egyptians, the ~ 
priests of the latter being probably sowers of disloyalty 

pone the people. . 

Tp denotes T as edited by a later Redactor. 

__C. City records, that is, written notices concerning the 
Bepalation, registers of clans, families, and of civil offi- 
sials, accounts of building operations—wall buildings, &c. 
include also under C the sections describing the work of 







1! Cheyne, Jewish Religious Life after the Exile, pp. 40 ff. 





*' 









36 ‘EZRA AND NE 


both Ezra and Nehemiah, and as far as 5 
concerned the autobiographical parts | 
below) might also be subsumed here. os 

Cx. This symbol will stand only for Ezraiv. 7-23, Ww 
though in Aramaic, has to do with the pra 
walls and not of the Temple. 


Pre, viz. vii. 27-ix. 
W. The Nehemiah nitobicseea history, tonectuanee 
Nehemiah’s own account of his coming to Jerusalem — 
and of his work there. This embraces Neh. i-vii. 5 (to 
which should probably be added verses 6-73*) + xiii. 4-31. 
_ Hardly any writer has ventured to impugn the genuine- 

ness or authenticity of this ‘I’ record. 

R. Parts due to a Redactor or Redactors. It is quite 
the fashion to make the Chronicler responsible for what, — 
in this volume, is ascribed to a Redactor or Redactors. — 
The resemblances between Chronicles and Ezra-Nehe- 
miah in words, phraseology, and point of view, are held to 
prove that one man, or at least men of one school, edited, 
co-ordinated, and assimilated all these books. But the 
fact that the differences ‘are more striking than the re-— 
semblances makes this supposition quite untenable. 

1. In Ezra~-Nehemiah singers and porters form ¢ classes _ 
outside of the Levites (cf. Ezra ii. 4o ff. (see on); Neh. 
vii. 43 ff, x. 28, &c.). In Chronicles the general word 
‘ Levites ’ includes all (see 1 Chron. xxiii. 3-5, &c.). The : 
departures from this distinction are probably the result of 
late editing ; they are, however, but few, notwithstanding — 
the averments of Toerey to the contrary, 

z. The same genealogies differ in Ezra-Nehemiah_ aie. 
in Chronicles (cf. Neh. xi and 1 Chron. ix). Had the 
Ezra-Chronicles been fashioned by one governi 
he would have prevented such discrepancies. é 

3. There are other differences which one generz ed ito: 


Wig 








would have removed, such as that between t ie two, % 
accounts of the observance of Tabernacles i in ‘Ezra already ae 





noticed (see p. 10). ; TS a we Sif 


4 ie aa 
al _.* 
as 


~ ane 
7A 


Ee. 
3 
Be 


_|') INTRODUCTION ©! ve 
gd Cavbmaleds is consistently at the Bode ‘of view of P, 
_ but Ezra-Nehemiah views things prevailingly from ah 
_ earlier point of view: see on Neh. ix. 6-37. 

5. The stage of law and custom in Ezra~-Nehemiah 
agrees in many important respects with that implied in 
- Malachi, so that a similar date for both is highly pia 
see under ‘Date? p. 18f. | 
~ 6. We come across the phrase < Narita (lit. sons ‘of 
Aaron) constantly in Chronicles as in’ P (see especially 
_Ex. to Num.), but only once is it found’ in Ezra-Nehe- 
-miah and in a context (Neh. xii. 47) that has many marks 
of late date: see, however, Ezra viii 5, and Neh. x. 38. 

_ Moreover, the subdivisions of the Levites (Gershonites, - 

&c., see 1 Chron. 'vi. 16 ff.), a prominent feature in ae iy 

are fpaisced over in silence in Ezra~-Nehemiah. 

7. The means of support of the priests and Levites 
differ in Ezra-Nehemiah (see Neh: X35 ff. ) oo Chronicles 
ec 1 Chron. vi. 54 ff.), 

8. We have ample Scars cavidende Jewish and 
Christian, that. in very ancient times Ezra-Nehemiah 

_ was treated. as one book, but there is not a particle «of 
such evidence that poe Ezra-Nehemiah formed 
one whole. 

_ 9. For a discussion of the Aramaic sections of Diva 

see p- 12 ff. These are ascribed to the imagination of the 

_ Chronicler by many who hold Ezra-Nehemiah to:be largely 

the work of the Chronicler. 

3 10. The dominant position of the priesthood in Chitin: 

; icles does not confront us in Ezra- Nehemiah. There are 
civil, as well as religious heads, and the former (cf. Zerub- 

ar Nehemiah) bulk much more largely in the history 

: and the records than the latter. Yet there‘is the begin- 
_ning of what in Chronicles is consummated. The priests 
“are named apart from the Levites (Ezra ii; Neh. vii), and in 
the case of Eliashib we see a man who in’ Nehemiah’s 

absence exercised a power reminding one of the priest-— 

_ kings of Maccabean days (Neh. xiii. 4, 28). 


De. tts 






: a are indicated i in the text heat << ' 
23 R. - Pa += 


V. DATE OF EzRa-NEHEMIAH. 
Ezra-Nehemiah seems to reflect the same set EY mee 

- stances that are implied i in Malachi. This isin particular 
true of Nehemiah, in which as in Malachi these three 


things stand out :— 2 ke 
I. Laxity i im the priesthood. ‘See Malachi i.. 6-4i, Di fe ; 
Neh. xiii. 4-9, 28. ig hee 


2. The neglect of the payment of tithe. See Malachi 
iii. 7-12; cf. Neh, xiii, 10-14. 

3. Mixed marriages, See Malachi ii, 10-16; eS Nehuis, 3 
23 x. 28, 30; xiii. 23-29; Ezra ix. 1 ff; x. 1 ff. 

ae the extant book of Ezra 3 only of ‘be above finds ae 
place, but in the complete Ezra records, which probably — 
existed at one time, the other evils might likewise have been — 
dealt with. Thecloser affinity of Malachi and Nehemiah 
has, however, led many scholars (Kuenen, Kirk., &c.) to 
fix the date of Malachi during the second visit of Neher 
‘miah in 432 B.C. Ze 

But there are several points in Malachi which link it | 
with the time before the priestly code came into vogue. ‘ 
The word ‘ Levites’ has the broad sense of D, and not — 
the narrow meaning it bears in P and Chronicles : see 
ii. 45 iii. 3. Paaye 1 7 

Priests and Levites are differentiated also. in Ezra- 
Nehemiah,’ but there is as yet no antagonism’ between the 
two classes, and, in fact, the priests receive their support 
in part by the hands of the Levites. See Neh. x god. 
This would suit a period 460 B. C. or so. — “a het, 

Morever the Heb. word minkhah has in Malachi the 
generic sense ‘an offering of any kind’ asin the older codes: 
see i. 10f., 13; ii. 12 f.; iii. 34. So | 


* See Ezra i. 5 and the note on. 





__ INTRODUCTION, go oie 


re i ES it has the pueaning ‘cereal’ (E.VV. ‘ meal ) 
distinction { from the ‘animal’ offering (zebakh). It is 
probable, therefore, that Malachi was written before 
458 B.C. cw. Rob. Smith, Wellh., Now., Marti), or at 
latest before the publication of the conolee Hexateuch 
(G. A. Smith). 

“Iti is, of course, quite possible for the language of a. 
former day to be kept up after it has ceased to express the 
ideas of the actual time; but this prophecy is serious; it 
seems to come red-hot ote the times, and to be as realistic 

as any sermon or sermons could well be. 
There are in Ezra-Nehemiah some touches which show 
late editing if nothing more, Ewald’s contention? that the 
expression ‘ Cyrus, King of Persia’ belongs to a time when 
the Persian supremacy had become a thing of the past, 
though largely adopted, has little to support it. If, as 
history shows, Cyrus had in 538 but recently become king 
of Persia, it would be natural in this record to give him 
this designation: or there might have been others bear- 
ing this name when this history was written. The ex- 
pressions ‘ Saul, King of Israel,’ ? ‘ Ear, King of Tyre,’ ® 
‘Rehoboam, King of Judah,’* and ‘Shishak, King of 
Egypt,’ * 5 do not mean that when they were first written 
the various kingdomsimplied had ceased to exist, though 
-we may not know for certain why the name of the country 
‘is appended. 

‘In Neh. xii. 11, 22, in the lists of high- priests, Jaddua 
is mentioned as third after Eliashib, i. e. three genera- 
‘tions after Nehemiah’s time, for Nehemiah and Eliashib 
‘were contemporaries. Now this Jaddua must be the 
high-priest of that name whom Josephus ® brings into con- 
‘nexion with Alexander the Great, and who must there- 
fore have functioned about 330 B.C. 








4 1 History of Isr. ap leks 2 y Sam. xxix. 3. 
_ * 2 Kings ix. iz. 41 Kings xii. 27,  ° 1 Kings xiv. 25. 
: 6 Antig. viii. 8, 5, and 9, 1. 
& 
> 


C2 

























rae Re! he is named last, and’ as aw vere ac 
“of the writer, these verses at ‘least stents bd 
330 B.C., though Vitringa, ‘Keil, ‘Ew. 
may be quite right in saying that these v 
insertions. 

The words ‘in the days of Nehemiah’?! r 
been written during that leader’s lifetime, but th d 
not help much in ascertaining the date of the boo! thes. d 
not unlikely that the use in Neh.i. 11 of the word . ma 

(Lord), apparently for Yahweh, implies a date subseq 
to the introduction among the Jews of the custom of. 5 
stituting the former for the latter. But we do not k ss 
when this custom began ; ; all that can be definitel 


Persian’ in Neh. xii. 22 is Darius Codomannus bree d 
B.C.), but, as already remarked, the whole of this verse 1S 
been largely held to be an interfidlattonl: ae a 
Zunz, Rosenzweig, Néldeke, and Reuss adie 
~ Nehemiah a product of the third century B.C. if not 
But even the latest parts are a Sufficient answer to 
for the last high-priest known to the final 
Jaddua (about 330 B.C.), and the remaining ] parts of 
enti: have every impress of a much earlier d 
One may safely say that Ezra~-Nehemiah 2 a 
made up out of contemporary records kept aoe O1 
elsewhere, sacred and civic: that with very few ex 
the final editing was completed before the pub 
the P code, i.e. prob. before 400 B.C. But there a 
marks of a later date, though so few bya! s 


| ENTRODUCTION, 


OS als + 


‘VI . SOME RECENT DISCUSSIONS BEARING ON THESE 
Laie s OR ON THE HISTORY WHICH THESE 
; BOOKS CONTAIN. 


Bhat the last half-century more discussions have 

arisen and more books been written about Ezra-Nehemiah 
‘than about any other equal portion of the Old Testament, 
and we seem as far as ever from finality onthe matter. To 
‘these discussions British scholars have contributed but 
little, though the writings of Sayce, Ryle, Sir Henry 
Howorth, and Cheyne bearing on the subject are worthy 
‘of praise. America is represented by the radical and 
destructive criticism of Torrey’, who has found followers 
‘in his fellow countrymen H. P. Smith, C. F. Kent, and 
perhaps L. W. Batten. The books and articles by 
Dutch (Kuenen, Kosters, &c.), French (vy. Hoonacker), 
and especially by German (Bertheau-Ryssel, Sellin, &c.) 

scholars are legion. In the limited space allowed in this 
volume the present writer is unable fully to state, much 
less adequately to estimate, the opinions put forth. 

I. Up to the time of W. H. Kosters (d. as Professor 
at Leyden in 1897) the books of Ezra-Nehemiah were, 
generally considered by scholars to rest on contemporary 
sources, and therefore to be historical—with but slight 
exceptions. It was Kosters who started the theory that _ 
throughout these two books the Chronicler has been busily, 
-at work, altering, transposing, and inventing to make the 

whole tally with his notions of the religious history of 
Israel. In the result we have much more of the Chronicler 
than of the historian. Kosters, however, did not deny or 
call i in question the main facts of Ezra’s life and work as_ 
they are portrayed in Ezra vii-x, though he regarded 
"Ezra vii-x as the creation of the Chronicler’s mind, and 
held the true chronological order to be Nehemiah-Ezra, 
‘hot the contrary. Dr. C. C. Torrey, of Yale Univer- 





. »..... 3 See Bibliography, p. 37. 


a 


24 “EZRA, AND (NEH 


is referred to by name or otherwise. He 
who executes His will and says to Je 








calls him His anointed one, who on account of t 
allotted him of Selrerin Israel is enabled to | mp 
over all his foes. These words and the like | represent 
hopes and expectations in Israel about the time in at 
tion, and if they are ost eventum in their origin, : all 
same they prove that the event implied had taken place, 
or the writer would not stultify himself by expressing as 
expectations things which the actual facts of the time 
proved to be impossible. 
(4) If no return about 538 B.C, took place, what ae: we. 
to make of the words gé/a and bene géla (‘exile’ and — 
exiles’) which stand in contradistinction to the ‘people 
of the land’ in 2 Kings xxiv. 14, xxv. 12, and elsewhere ? 
These returned exiles are spoken of not only in Ezra ivi, 
but also in Ezra ix. 4,x.6; Neh.i.2f. Of the people left 
in the country a few ‘foitied themselves to the community. 
fresh from Babylon, but they are never mentioned by 
themselves as an independent social unit, and i in the ac- 
count of the rebuilding and of the reforms they 2 are vir-| 
tually ignored. Eight years or so after the return the 
Jewish community in and about Jerusalem has. the 
gola, i.e, exiles, or the congregation of the Gola’, 
‘(c) The charac given by Ezekiel (see xxviii. 23 ff. ff.)to the: 


name 
pr tat 


- unexiled Jews does not make one think they were the f ople 
to have much concern about the restoration of the Temple. 
and also of Jewish orthodoxy. Indeed, the sec nd Is in 


his forecast of the new time leaves them out of account,and__ 
: Jeremiah speaks of them with no more respect than ekiel. 
It is evident from many parts of Ezekiel that ‘the: pro- 
phet, and his companion exiles expected a return; see 
XXXVi. 8-15. Not at all imprebaRet this expectation w as” 


1 Sliv. 28. ; : 2 Vy. PREP UE A 
=*_Ezta ix, 4, x6, 9, 16. - Ezra 3 = mee i Be Neh. i iL ‘of A 


ae BS 





Ec ae _ INTRODUCTION. stig 25 






LV Bcd by. the movements of Cyrus and a knowledge of 
the policy he pursued towards deported people. 
e.g Lhe French writers de Saulcy, Havet, Vernes, Im- 
Petts Halévy? , and especially .v. Hoonacker (Roman 
3 Catholic Professor at Louvain) and. the Dutch scholar 
Bs Kosters ? , have endeavoured to prove that the true 
- chronological order is Nehemiah-Ezra and not the 
. contrary, or at least that N ehemiah’s attempts at reform- 
_ preceded those of Ezra. Some of their reasons are the 
3 _ following : ~ 
_._ (1) When Ezra arrived at Jerusalem he found the city 
? in a peaceable and orderly condition, which, it is said, im- 
"plies that the walls had been repaired and the city other- 
_ wise fortified. But how can we so argue when our know- 
_ ledge of the state of things is so meagre? Of the sixty 
_*years preceding Ezra’s arrival we know nothing—what in 
" that interval took:-place we have at present no means of 
- finding out. 
(2) If (it is said) the reforming measures of Ezra had 
_ been taken before the arrival of Nehemiah the latter must 
-have mentioned them. One may turn the same argument 
_ against y. Hoonacker and Kosters and say, if Nehemiah’s 
4 reforms antedated the arrival of Ezra, the latter must have 
"made some allusion to them. In fact any argumentum 
silentio is precarious, especially if it has reference tothe 
writings of the O. T.: seep. Io. 
(3) It is further maintained that Ezra’s reforms were 
ues more. radical and extreme than those of Nehemiah, 
for whereas Ezra demands the divorce of all. foreign 
“wives *, Nehemiah goes no further than to. forbid inter- 
"marriage , between Jewish children and the. children of 
foreigners *. The work of Nehemiah has therefore, it is 
inferred, all the appearance of being tentative and intro- 






ws. : Revue ie P Histoive des Religions, 1886, 334-58. 
op. cit. 
Miah? ee Eora x inf, sass * Neh, xiii, 25. 


26 EZRA AND NEHEML 






the a #riori kind, ade} in reply one indy! sy’ Fs 
failure of the more drastic reforms pers co by 


rise and growing influence of the Saimatitia party led to “4 
a broadening of sympathies and outlook which the Per- 
sian officials would be sure to encourage. Indeed, such a : 
latitudinarian tendency, alike in belief and in the cultus, — = 
grew and spread throughout the land until it was stiddenly — 
checked by the Maccabean uprising. Among those who é 
make Ezra’s reforms follow upon Nehemiah’s there are con- 
siderable divergences of opinions as to details. v.Hoon- 
acker! says Ezra came to Jerusalem first of all in the reign 
of Artaxerxes I, and‘fora time worked with N ehemiah, but ; 
soon returned to Babylon, whence he set out again for Jeru-_ ‘5 
salem in the reign of Artaxerxes IT, i. e. about 398° ‘B.C, this | 
time armed with great authority, whidi he used in putting 
down the mixed marriages. Kosters *-puts the work of Ezra’ . 
after the incidents of Neh. xiii. Wellhatsen*® seems to” 
think that the reading and expounding of thelaw (Neh. viii) _ 
by Ezra belong to the period of Nehemiah’s second visit, 
though he does not deny the arrival of Ezra in 458 B. C, 
or call in question the part ascribed to him at patting’ 
down mixed marriages. z 
Franz Buhl, Professor of Arabic at Copertlanee for 
some years Franz Delitzsch’s successor at Leipzic, has” 
. récetitly published a history of Israel in Danish inf which — 
in the’ relevant portion he endeavours to make’ Ge0d ‘the: 
following theses :— oleate had 
1.'That ‘Nehemiah, Having received the king's per- 
mission, came to Jerusalem in 445 B.C., repaired the walls 
and introduced cértain social reforms, returning thi 
to Susa after an absence of twelve years, Neh. i-vii. 5s 
z. Subsequently Ezra came from Babylon to Jerse, 





1 Nouvelles Etudes, &c., 270 ff. Ry i at, 
’ Geschichte), 177 f. . 


a ~al 





erat INTRODUCTION. 3 27 
“bringing with him the law book which he endeavoured 


E to put into practice. . His efforts to put an end to mixed 
5 “marriages: were however unsuccessful, whereupon he re- 


~ turned to Babylon, Ezra vii-x. 


“3. Nehemiah finding Ezra’s efforts unavailing returned 
to Jerusalem, and succeeded in carrying out in a less 


drastic way the reforms which Ezra failed to carry out, 


Neh. xi-xiii. : 
It is noteworthy that the reasoning by which it is 


_ sought to prove that Ezra’s visit, or at least the bulk of 
~ his work, followed that of Nehemiah is almost exclusively 


of the a Zvior7 kind, and can be met by a frior7 considera- 


_ tions of a contrary kind. In no codex, edition, or version 


of the Hebrew Bible has any different order of the 
history of these Jewish leaders been found, and tradition, 
Jewish and Christian, is completely on the side of the old 
view—Ezra first then Nehemiah. _ Tradition has indeed 


_ in other things been proved to be wrong, but it can be 


_ discarded only at the call of evidence clear and cogent. _____ 


, 


4. Much has of late years been written as to the 
relation between the Canonical Ezra and the Apocryphal 
1 Esdras (Vulg. 3 Esdras), which in matter coincide in 
the main. 1 Esdras is, however, more extensive than Ezra, 
for at its beginning (ch. i) it has 2 Chron. xxxve I= 
XXxVi. 21, and at its close (ix. 37-55) it adds Neh. vii. 73> 
Vili. 12, beSides which it inserts 1 Esdras iii. 1-vi (Darius 
and the three youths, guards of the royal chamber, 
Zerubbabel being one of them). From the fact that 
1 Esdras, besides embracing Ezra, has also at its Begin- 
ning and end parts of Chronicles and Nehemiah, it has 
been concluded by many modern scholars that our 
present 1 Esdras is but the fragment of an older docu- 
ment which included Chronicles-Ezra-~-Nehemiah in that 

_ order. 
_ Moreover a large aeniber of scholars, especially of 
recent times, take’ the’ view that 1 Esdras represents the 


_ true LXX, the original Canonical Ezra corresponding to 












ee 


25 Taat EZRA AND NER 


it having” been lost. So Whiston 1, n 
burg, Cheyne, Howorth?, Bertholet, Nestle, anc 
Bertholet, Torrey, and others maintain | that the. 
1 Esdras iii. 1-v. 6, which is unworthy of its 
and moreover contradicts chronologically. the 
chapters, is a late interpolation and had no H 
original, Howorth, however, strenuously argues. for the 
_ genuineness of this part of 1 Esdras, holding, as others — 
have before him, that its Greek is interlarded with Hebra- _ 
isms (Deissmann and Moulton would hardly allow Sie 
designation), just as is the rest of the book. | 
What has passed as the LXX of Daniel, and as such 
is printed in copies of the LXX, has im recent years been — 
proved in reality to be Theodotion’s version, the true e. 
LXX rendering being found in the so-called Greek codex _ ~~ 4 
-Chisianus (from the family Chigi who owned it). In _ 
a.similar way it is argued that the Greek version of Esdras — ; 
now found in the LXX isin reality Theodotion’s big 
1 Esdras representing the LXX version. . ; > 
_The evidence offered is external and internal. — sp 
1, External. (2) Josephus uses it in all cases, iinieh :: 
for other. books it is the LXX he follows. In fact for the © ; 
period covered by 1 Esdras, Josephus’s. history, is. Tittle, a 
more than a paraphrase of this baat : a ae RN 7 
(4) There are, Howorth says‘, strong reas ae ale By ; 
lieving that in Origen’ s Hexapla 1 Esdras takes th ae 
of our LXX version. Oe . 
(c) In the foreword to the Syriac version. - ‘5 Badeay 
in Walton’s, Polyglot it is said that this version omy 
from the LXX. 
(d) In the Syriac version of Paulas of Tella, L baa 
takes the place of the Canonical Ezra. _ 
(e) Howorth will have it* that in the Vetus Itala also 
1 Esdras had the place which in our Bible Ezra holds ich in our Bible Fara holds, et 





1 Essay on the Text of the O.T.:  -» 6 OT. ih shes 
~ »# See articles in Academy, Jan., June 1893; PS! 
OF PSBA. xxiv. p. 255 * loc, cit, 16 
iP i liter ae eee 
teu 





J*TINTRODUCTION~ “2g 


2. Intertial evidence. (a) It is held by Dr. Gwyn}, 
- ‘Thackeray,® and Howorth that the Greek of the true 
_ LXX of Daniel is remarkably like that of 1 Esdras, 
_ though, as Thackeray remarks, this proves only that one 
man translated both. On the contrary, Howorth adds 
- that the present LXX of Daniel and of Ezra are both 
very literal, as we know Theodotion’s version was. The 
present writer has read the two Greek texts, that of Ezra 
and that of 1 Esdras, without feeling strongly the cogency 
of this latter remark. Similarly Howorth endeavours 
now to prove that the Apocryphal Prayer of Manasseh 
"represents a portion of the true LXX of 2-Chron. xxx. 3.° 
Keil, followed by Bissell and (formerly) by Schiirer’, 
held that 1 Esdras is a compilation based on the LXX 
version of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. The grounds 
~for this conclusion and a succinct discussion of other 
views can be seen in Bissell’s valuable commentary on-the 
Apocrypha, 
Herzfeld, Fritsche, Ginsburg, Thackéray, Nestle, and 
(formerly) Ewald hold that 1 Esdras is an independent 
“Greek translation from a now lost Hebrew (or Aramaic) _ 
- original in many respects superior to our M.T. This is 
_ the latést view of Schiirer®, and it is that supported by 
Howorth. . 
' The opinion advocated by Ewald in the later editions 
_ of his History is that 1 Esdras is the result of a working © 
over-of an earlier Greek translation now lost. This 
assumes that there were two independent Greek trans- 
lations of Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, as we now know 
there were of Daniel. 
3 “ The notes in this volume on Ezra-Nehemiah will show 


_ that the present writer has often found 1 Esdras more ser- 


( 
oe 
: 


__ Viceable in the restoration of the correct Hebrew text than 
; 1 Smith, DB@., Esdras A. 2 Hastings, DB., i. 761 B. 
» § PSBA., xxxi. 89 ff. 

- + History of the Jewish People, ii. iii. 179 f. ; Herzog@), i. 4968. 
® Herzog), i. 637. 















se.sEZRA AND NEHEMIAH 


the M.T. ,On the other hand he has had in at | ; 
- ‘many instances to reject the readings implied.in. I Esdr 

And certainly 1 Esdras iiiry. 6 cannot have - 
a part of the original 1 Esdras in either Hebrew or 
Greek, for it stands in contradiction to the rest of the e book, Poe 
forms no essential part of it, and, moreover, occupies lower — 
ground than the rest of the book. fe 

On the whole 1 Esdras has a better Seamare of events” 
than our Ezra-Nehemiah (see on Neh. vii, 73» ff.),. and ae 
represents not improbably a better Hebrew (and Aramaic) oy 
_ original, in which case it is to be reckoned a part of ie 
true LXX of Chronicles-Ezra- Nehemiah. 


VII. “CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 


The period covered by Ezra~Nehemiah was on the 
whole a barren one from the literary point of view, as — 
might have been expected, for it was a time of national — 
reconstruction, and the energies of the leaders of the 
people were spent in the work of restoring the old inatito- S 
tions, and reorganizing the new community. © 

Cheyne’, Briggs, and other writers on the Pash: 
agree that in the early and middle Persian period, i.c. 
in the period which comprehends the life and work of 
Ezra and Nehemiah, there was a great burst of sacred | 
song. Among such Briggs reckons forty whole psalms 
and portions of ten ethers. All the so-called ‘ persecution — 
psalms’ are included (Ps. xxvi. &c.), the persecutors being 
the Samaritan party, Though certainty on the matter 
is unattainable, for no one of these’psalms bears decisive 
date-marks, yet strong evidence of an accumulative kind 
supports in a general way the conclusions of Cheyne and 
Briggs, which in the main agree. Renan in his Mastory® _ 
connects a large number of the same psalms with this 
period. The so-called ‘royal’ or ‘theocratic: psalms’ z 


1 Origin oft the Psalter, p. 230 et passim. \' 9 Ps, i, Tae 
’ Book vii, untranslated into English.” 





ope ae ee ee 





= 2 aeth| “INTRODUCTION. 5 Bee 31 

1 xciii-c, except pee are commonly interpreted as voicing. 

the. confidence i in the Divine rule which the deliverance 

_ from: Babylon called forth (see on Ps. xciii, Introduction, 
Century Bible). 

- ft has been already shown that Malachi must have 
_ been composed before 458 B.C., or at latest before 
"444 B.C 

_ — Another literary product of the time is, according to 

Z most recent scholars, the Book of Ruth, written primarily 

4 "as a protest against the prohibition of mixed marriages 
_ by Ezra and Nehemiah. The writer might himself have 

: ~ been guilty of the very sin which these leaders so strongly 

_ denounced ; but in any case he seems in this charming 

- idyll to champion the cause of foreign women, who like 

_*Ruth the Moabitess’ (constantly so called by a kind of 

delicate irony)- had married into Israel, and whom it 

seemed cruel to cast adrift to shift for themselves, a pre- 

_ carious task for an Eastern woman. 

Isa. lviii. 13% and Jer. xvii. 19-27, each enforcing 
‘strict sabbath observance, are connected by modern 

" criticism with Neh. ix. r4 and xiii. 15-21, and made to 

" arise under the influence of the same religious movement. 

Both passages stand apart from their present context, 

_ and are regarded by most recent scholars as late interpo- 
“lations. It is significant that the Sabbath is not once 
_ referred to in II Isaiah (except in the above verses), Haggai, 
Zechariah, Malachi, Psalms, Proverbs, Job, or even in 
Genesis, except in the account of its establishment - 
a 2f. P). 

_ Large portions of Isaiah besides the above are assigned 
to the Persian period. Duhm regarded practically the 

Sarhole of Isa. lvi-Ixiv (called by him ‘Trito-Isaiah’) as 
_ belonging to the time of Nehemiah, and (except in Ixiii. 7—- 

: Ixiv, 12 (Heb. 11), and other smaller sections) Cheyne and 

Whitehouse follow him. According to Cheyne and Driver - 








P ~~ ¥F 1 
ES . See p. 18f. 


32 


iy pet ge Ok Oe 
P a 
eS »J 


EZRA AND! NEWEMIAH 


Isa. xxiv-xxvii (Cheyne and Whitehouse add’ any 
belong to the close of the Persian period Gait 
See for details the commentaries on Isaiah, ¢s 
Marti and also Whitehouse, Century Bible. 





o 


VIII. IMPORTANT DATES IN Jewish, PERSIAN, Re. 


HISTORY. ae 
N.B. All the dates are x.c. ae :: 
~~" Jewisu. PERSIAN, Greek, Ecyprian, &c, 
Babylon conquered Fa 


by Cyrus, 538. 
First return of Jews 
from Babylon, 537. 
Foundation of the 
Temple laid, 536. 


Temple built by Jews 
at Elephantiné 
(Yeb)', cir. 536. 

Reign of Cambyses, 
529-522. 

Conquest of Egypt 


Haggai and Zecha- 
riah prophesy, 520. 


by Cambyses, 527-|- 


525. He destroys the 
Completion of the 
Temple, 515. tians, but spares the 
Jewish temple at 
Elephantiné.* 
Pseudo - Smerdis 
reigns, 522. 
Reign of Darius I 
(Hystaspis), 521- 
486. He invaded 
Europe cir. 500. 
Reign of Xerxes, 


485-465. 


Reign of Artaxerxes 
I(Longimanus),465- |} 
424: 





(TE 


Rule. of Pista, 
d. 527. 


Ionian revolt against 
the Persians, cir. 
509. : 


temples ofthe Egyp-| 


~ of ss 


Eevpt hale Hoste is 
reconquered 
Persia, 


Battle of Thermopy- 
lae and Salamis, 480. 

Herodotus and Aes- 
chylus fl. cir. 460. 

Battle of Plataea and 


Reet? 3 Fey in 


Egypt, 462-456. 


rm 





1 See Sachau, Aram. Papyri, 13 £3 cf. Sayce-Cowley, | Aram. 


Be 


Papyri. 


- 


Slee Mel i ds 






Sr Peal 


— pve 





Composition of Ma- 
- lachi_ and Isa. lvi- 
Ixvi (with some ex- 


ceptions, see _be- 
low), cir. 460. 

Second return of 
‘Jews ee Ezra), 
458. | 

_Nehemiah’s ' arrival 
“at Jerusalem; re- 


form in social life 
- and the « cultus; 
repairing of the 
walls, all-in 445. 
<Isa. lviii. 19 f.. “and 
Jer. "xvii. 19-27, 
written, cir. 444- 


The Priestly Codex 
- completed, 440. 


Nehemiah’s second 
visit to Jerusalem, 
= $32: 


Secession of the Sa- 
maritan party, cir. 
_430. 

Jews at Elephantiné 
appeal to Jews at 
Jerusalem for help 


to rebuild their 
temple’. 
The Prophecy of 


_Joel, cir. 404. 
Publication of our 
etapa cir. 400. 


7. 


PERSIAN, 


Xerxes II murdered 
by his_ half-brother 
Sogdianus, 424. 
Reign of Darius II 
(Nothus), 423-404. 


Reign of Artaxerxes 
II (Mnemon), 404- 
359- 

He sends his rescript 
to the Greeks, 387. 





at: sain ee 


- 


GREEK, EGYPTIAN, &c. 





Revolt of Megabyzus 
in Syria, 448. 


Building of the 
Samaritan temple 
on Gerizim, 334-. 
co bb . 

Pelopohnesidn'’ ‘war, 


431-404. 


Socrates, Sophocles, 
Aristophanes fi., cir. 
420, : up 


Euripides, Plato, 
‘Xenophon ‘fl., cir, 
400. * 

‘Defeat of Cyrus Tl 
at the battle of 
~Cunaxa, 4or. 
Xenophon ‘condtiéts 
the 10,000 Greeks 
back, cir. 400. 








D 


‘1 See Sachau; Avram. Papyri. 








J EWISH, PERSIAN. vi 





Reign of Artaxerxes 
Ill (Ocka 359- 
Jaddua, high-priest | 338. 

at Jerusalem, 351- 

323- Darius III (Codo- 
-Ezra-Neu. com- manus), 338-331. 
_pleted, cir. 320. 








Alexpider, the ‘Gal 


End of the Persian} conquers and — 


Kingdom, 33r. nexes Persia; 33r. 
Onias I became high- | Wars of the Romans - 


priest, 323. with | the Sa tes, 







Capture of Jerusalem 
_ by Ptolemy I, 320. 
Ptolemy Tl ae 








delphus) Ss ell 
285-247. 
Antiochus III con- First (264), second _ 
* quers Palestine, 203. (218), and igittes 
(149) 

_ Antiochus IV (Epi- Treaty of mille ea with 
‘phanes), tormentor | Hannibal, 215. 
of the Jews, reigned First. Macedonian, 
in Syria, 175-164. war, we) teatut 2 

‘The revolt of the ees 
Maccabees, 167. Pdr eae < are hak 
Jonathan made high- af it. Se 
priest by Demetrius, - { o% aes Fpaety by 
153- “ior $i todas | ‘eh Co 
Simon __ succeeding =) eT 


Jonathan as_high- 
_ priest becomes also 


prince, 142. Tiberius ‘= ) and 





Joha Hyrcanus, king Caius (123g) Gr 
from 134. chus Roman  tri- 

Alexander Jannaeus _buness 
from 103... Birth of. Cicero and 










The books of EstHer, Festi. 2 Mace., and Jubil 
about too. 


- 


INTRODUCTION: rs 








oni * ABBREVIATIONS. 
Et 7s) 3. GENERAL. — 
ate, = accusative. COT. = Cuneiform Inscriptions 
 B.c., im the usual sense, occurs and the O.T., by E. Schrader, 
B only where there can be any translated by O. C. White- 
3 doubt. All the Biblical dates house. yes 
in these volumes are B.c. KAT,.© =The third edition of 
4 _ fem. = feminine. the same (really a new work) 
| “Hiph. = Hipb‘il. : | by Winckler and Zimmern, 
_ impf.= imperfect. 1g02. 
impv. = imperative, DB.= Hastings’: Dictionary of 
mast. = masculine. the Bible. 
on =Niph‘al. _ ENCYC. BIB. = Encyclopaedia 
pass. = passive. Biblica (Cheyne). 
perf. = perfect. G. K. = Gesenius’.. Hebrew 
part. = = participle. Grammar, edited by 






Pi. = Pitel. Kautzsch, Oxford, 1898. 


prep. =preposition. PSBA, = Proceedingsof the So- 

_ pron, = pronoun. ciety of Biblical Archaeology. 

A (JSL.=American Journal of | SDB.=Hastings’small Diction- 
Semitic Languages. | ary of the Bible. ; 


_ Hiph., Ni., and Pi. denote forms of the Hebrew verb which 
express (most commonly) the following modifications of the simple 
idea of the verb (i.e. the Qai): causative, passive, and intensive 
respectively. ' 

' ‘J @ahwist), E (Elohist), JE (Jehovist), D (Deuteronomist), 
‘ and P (Priestly Writer) stand for the authors of the documents 
- on which the Pentateuch (or Hexateuch) is supposed to be 
iy pastichy based. 

2. TEXTS_AND VERSIONS. 


yr 1. HEBREW. Sym. =Symmachus. 

_ M.T.=Massoretic Text. (That | 2#¢.=The Lucian recension of 

+ - of the ordinary vocalized He- the LXX: closer to the M.T, 
brew Bible.) : than the LXX. 


_ SBOT; = Sacred Books of the | 1 £sd.=1 Esdras (Apocrypha). 
/~ O.T. (general editor, P. Esdras A of the LXX, 3 Es- 
_ ~ Haupt ; Ezra-Neh., edited by dras of the Vulgate, 

Guthe-Batten). 3. Lamin. 
' ket.=ketib. (The consonants 
and the implied vowels of the Jero, = Jerome. 
_ Hebrew Bible.) Vulg. = Vulgate. 
“gr. = 4°ré. (The textas emended 4. ENGLISH. 


fe Se) A.V.= Authorized Version.) 

R.V.=Revised Version. 

E.VV.=The above two Ver- 
sions. 

O. T.=Old Testament. 

N. T.=The Ne ~ Testament. 

























"The Arabic (Saadia), Eeniopie; naa 
- been constantly consulted in Walton’s Poly 
(Targ.') on Esther Walton’s Polyglot and . 
Bible have been used. Cassel’s edition. of Ti 

RA, “Been the one referred to, 


ae qc COMMENTARIES, 


IR large number of Commentaries in ea ae ag 
been consulted, but, below will be found those’ to 
present writer feels himself most indebees i 





)) Ber.= Bertheau. | itn 
Berthol. = Bertholet (in Marti). Se 
_» BerRys. = Bertheau-Ryssel. 2 x bel rials 
~ Guthe-Batten (SBOT. for the text), UES 3 
» Jahn, G., 1909. + Sev) aes 


soe My ‘Kamphausen in Bensen’s Bibelwerk. aL ATR 
Kautasch = Die Heilige Schrift. =e 
~ Keil. - i tab) eee aay 
- \, Oettli in Strack-Zéchler. iel at gen: ae 
. Rawl, = Rawlinson in Speaker's Commentary. = \ 
3 E<Feyle i in Cambridge Bible. ; 
_.) Schulte in Lange. si as ate 
| Siegfried in Nowack. eds De! i " as 


étter LitEeAtURE eee TO. 


See the histories of Jost, Herzfeld@, Ewald®. Graetz®, Si 
Schiirer ©), .Wellhausen , A. Klostermann, Guthe, the the e 
used being” indicated by the bracketed index number after the n: 
Adeney, W. F. : ‘Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther,’ Exposito 
: 1893 in 
eehsyar "Jewish Religious Life after the Exile, 1898, oF. 

Geissler : Diz litter. Beziehungen, &c.; 1898. | 
Hoon, = v. Hoonacker' : Nehémie et Esdras, < 

> Etudes, &¢., 1896. 

~ Howorth, H.: Articles in Sicutniag (1893, &c.) and 
eetojof: Society of Biblical Archaeology. ' Sr Hee 

Te Jamp. = Jampel, Sigmund, Die Wiederherstellung I: 
Ft Contains useful matter, but ill digested and often, 
Kalisch, Heilige Schrift. 
* Kamp. = Kamphausen in Bunsen’s Bibelwerk. 1 slate: 
Kent, C. F.: The Student's Old Testament, 1905, &e, 
Kosters, W. H.: Die Wiederherstellung, 8c. ‘(from the I 
‘Kuenen-Budde: Ges, Abhandlungen, 1894. Kecat 
ue Marquart : Fundamente israelitischer und jiidischer C 
Meyer, E. : Die Entstehung des Judenthums, 1896 ; 
Part. aes Alterthums, Band iii, Wes 


a) - ‘ > a 
> a. : : - 


oe 


INTRODUCTION ee a 





- Mommert, RARE opographie des alten Jerusalem, Theile i-iv, 1g00- 


pie. LQOFs ; 
 Nikel, J. : Die Wiederherstellung des jiidischen Gemeinwesens nach 
dem babylomischen Exil, 1900. 
_Sayce: Intyod. to Ezra-Neh., 1885. _. 
' Sellin: Serubbabel, 1898; Siudien sur Entstehung, &c. ii, 1901. 
_Smend, R.: Die Listen, &c., 1881, 
Smith, G. Adam: Jerusalem from the Earliest Times to A.D. 70, 
- 2 vols.,- 1908. : 
"Smith, W. Robertson: Religion of the Semites®; The O.T. in the 
Jewish Church®; The Prophets of Israel®; Kinship and 
_ Marriage among the Arabs®), ] 
Torrey, C. T.: Composition and Historical Value of Ezra-Neh. 
_ Also ‘articles in American Journal of Semitic Languages 
_ (1908-9). 


NOTATION OF SOURCES (see p. 12 ff.). 


T=Temple records. = 
' Ta=Temple records in Aramaic. 
_ C=City records. 
* Ca =City records in Aramaic. 
' E=Ezra, autobiographical parts. 
_ Ce =City records dealing with Ezra’s work. 
_ Te=Temple records-dealing with Ezra’s work. 
~ N=Nehemiah, autobiographical parts. 
_ Cy =City records dealing with Nehemiah’s work. . 
~ R=Parts due to a Redactor or to Redaction. 
_ It is assumed that the preceding sources have been all more or 
less edited by-R. j 
_ ‘The addition of R to the symbol for a source means that the 
source has been edited in an unusual degree. 
E -U=Unknown sources, . 
_ _WN.B. When renderings are given words put in brackets are 
added to make the sense clearer, but are not represented directly 
in the Heb., though often implied. 





7 














re Miles a 
e 20 ee) a Cty igen 


The Persian Province (or Governorship) of juli itself a as 
of the Satrapy of Transp >tamia (see on Ezra ix. 8) wass ae ea 
into districts (Heb. pelek), of which eight are mentioned hig 
(verses 9. 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19) and a ninth is suplie ( send 
half of Beth-zur, ver. 16). There might have been others. Juda 
and Samaria seem to have been separate provinces, each with 
its own governor, though at times (as before the advent of Ezra 
and Nehemiah) the governor of Samaria had jurisdiction over 
Judah also, as in the case of Rehum (see pp, 85, 170, and 260). 


een gor EZRA 


~ LVI. History or tHE Return oF THE First Batt oF 
' ExiLes From BaByLON AND OF THE EVENTS WHICH IM- 
MEDIATELY FOLLOWED. Date : 538 (first year of Cyrus) to 516, 


. For analysis of this section see, Introd., p. 5, and for a dis- 
~ eussion of the sources see Introd., p. 12 ff... It is quite clear that, 
neither Ezra nor Nehemiah had-anything to do with the com- 
position of these’ chapters, the whole of which, with the exception 
of Ezra iv. 6-23, belongs to.a period more-than half a,century 
_ before Ezra appears on the scene. 
Ezrai(z Esd. ii. 1-14). Cyrus authorizes and encourages the 
_ Jews of Babylon to return to Jerusalem and to rebuild the Temple., 
Cyrus (Heb. Koresh ; Bab. Kurash ; Pers, Kurush), was prob- 
ably a Persian, and therefore an Aryan, for. in an. inscription. 
Darius Hystaspis speaks of .‘Cambyses, son of Cyrus one. of 
our race.’ Both Cyrus? and Darius 1% were descendants of 
Achaemenes ; but Darius des¢ribes himself as a.‘ Persian,.son of 
a Persian, an Aryan, of Aryan descent,‘’ so that Cyrus must 
also have been a Persian and an Aryan. Sayce, on the other hand, 
maintains that Cyrus, as originally king of Anshan (or Anzan) in 
Elam, was an Elamite ; but being king of a province of Elam is no 
~ proof of Elamite nationality (see. Sayce, Records of the Past, 
and series, v. 144 ff., and DB. ‘ Cyrus’). Cyrus is called also King 
> of Babylon, of Sumer, and of Akkad. There is, however, no cer- 
tainty where exactly Anshan was, though, since de Morgan’s dis- 
et es agree that it bordered on Susa and Southern 
_ Babylonia. If of Elamite origin, Cyrus was by upbringing 2 poly- 
theist ; if of Persian origin he would be a Zoroastrian, and as such 
well disposed to that policy of toleration of other religions which 
we rightly connect with his name. 
When king of Anshan he overcame the Persians, becoming: 
king of both Anshan and Persia. With his augmented forces he 
marched against the Medes, now greatly weakened through 
_-attacks by Lydians and nomad tribes of Scythian race. He 
- now aimed. at augmenting his kingdom and securing its greater 

safety by adding to his conquests that of Babylon. Nabonidus, the 

last king of Babylon, had estranged his subjects in the provinces 
_ by his policy of removing the local gods to Babylon, just as 
_ Hezekiah had given offence to his Led subjects by a similar 
_ policy in Palestine (see 2 Kings xviii. 22) ; religious centralization 
_ being in both cases regarded as the prelude to political centraliza- 


t 


r 





Age Sce the Behistun inscriptions, i. 10. 
_ ® Records of the Past,ix.p.67. * Ib.,p.79, &c. * Ib. p-75- 








40 EZRA 


tion. Babylonians were on the whole glad to v 
and his forces, knowing as they did.that the ‘ great Kin 
and even encouraged every people’ to worship their 
gods and to continue the worship and sacrifice which h 


Ezra which ascribe to Cyrus the decree ‘referring ‘to the retern 
from Babylon and the rebuilding of the Temple are inventions of - 
the ‘Chronicler to confirm what is ‘said of'Cyras ‘in Isa. xli25, 

xliv.' 28, ‘xlv. 1, &c.- Cf. Joseph.) ‘Antig: xi. 1. 2. But why, 

doés thot’ the’ CHronicler' make ‘Cyrus concern himself about the 

rebuilding of the ¢ity walls‘as ‘well ‘as the Temple?” “Moreover, it 











is’said ‘that the’ Chronicler ascribes to Cyrusthis own sentiments, 


making the Persiah king a follower of Yahweh, ‘deeply Solicitous— 
about the interésts of Judaism and its’ institutions: ‘But’ recent! 
diseoveréd cuneiform inscriptions have taken off the edge of # 
objection; for in them Cyrus speaks the languagé of the ‘peoples’ 


; 


he! conquéred. Ths, when writing! for Babylomians “he says 24 


that ‘the god Marduk had called him to be ‘king, an@’he ascribes - 
his'success in war to the other Babylonian deities Bel and Nebo 
What Cyrus is made to say of Yahweh in'Ezrai.2 is vety strange 
until we find it and'much else that ‘in the nafrative surpfises us — 
matched in inscriptions which have come’ down to us (Seep. 14 f.).” 
The’ Chronicler' may be regarded ‘as using here-and in ~ 
Ezra-Nehemiah older, and in the’ main reliable; sources! © 
_ + It was'the' polity of the kings of Babylon to deport conquered 
people and to replace them by “loyal'!subjects from the near 
territory. It was the policy: of Cyrus ‘and of his sticcessors to 
encourage each’ Subject race fo retain its. ancestral faith. Assuni- 
ing that Cyrus was a’ Zoroastrian, he might seé in the gods ‘of 
other réligions néthing’ more than the one supreme ; 4 


“ 


Ahura Mazda; who’ manifests himself in firé’and light; in that — 


case-the'seemingly compromising language of ver. 2 and of 3 “ 
of the inscriptions’ would but represent the*‘king’s broader con-— 
ceptions ad wider’ faith. See further on-wi.t—-12, 1) en. 





“Note how in’the third Sacha papyrus Bagohi (Greek 


at Yeb, speaks of Yahweh as the ‘God of heaven” 


Sr See 
the! Pérsian ‘governer-6f Judah, in granting the request of tne Jere 
tos ane 


that the Temple shall be rebuilt and the sacrifices restored. 
wer : y +3 Uy VO es 


Settee 





: “BURA Loe ee 








mags (hy Ne ow in’ the first year of @ Cyrus king of Persia, that 1 


—% 


the word of the Lorp by'the mouth of Jeremiah might be ~ 
accomplished, ae LorD stirred up‘ the spirit of ee 
Spry 327 ; 

Z _ ©) 8 Heb. Coresh. 


inzi i — 


1-4. The ‘edict of Cyrus. See 1 Esd, ii, 1-7. In Ezra vi.'3-5 
we have another version, perhaps the very words preserved in 
“cocoate in the temple archives: see on these verses. 

1-34 agree almost verbatim with the last’ two verses of 
Bee eles “see Introd., p. 4. Z 
1. Now: in Heb. the particle usually translated ‘and.’ Its 

"presence here is no necessary proof of an original connexion 
“between this verse and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 21. The so-called ‘waw 
“consecutive ’ forms became independent tense inflexions implying 
in many cases no connexion with what has gone before, See 
Ms B. Davidson, Syntax, § 47. 

»_, first ycar of his rule over Babylon, te. 538. It was the twenty- 

& year of his reign over Anshan, The inscriptions show that 

yrus reckoned his reign from Nisan after he conquered Babylon. 
: king of Persia: though this title is most commonly used after 
the Persian kingdom had ceased to be, i, e. after 331, yetit occurs in 
the contemporary Cyrus inscription, column 24, and is not therefore 

“necessarily a proof of Jate date. In their memoirs Ezra and Nehe- 
mah have simply ‘the king,’ e.g. Ezravi. 14, vii. 27f., &c.; Neh. i. 11, 

by the mouth of Jeremiah: the reference is to Jer. xxix. 
Tp, where Yahweh promises at the end of seventy years to 
restore his exiled people. Assuming that the exile commenced 

606, .the seventy years would expire in 536, which may be the 
first year referred to in this verse, reckoning from the time when 
Darius the Mede ceased to exercise joint rule with Cyrus. But 

_we have here to do probably with a round number. 
os . accomplished : lit., “come to an end.’ The Hebrew word 
(rendered ‘ finished’) is eased also in Dan. xii. 7, of the fulfilment 

of. prophecy. God’s predictive word ceases, as such, when the 
event ‘foretold has come to pass. 

(the Lord) stirred up the (spirit of Cyrus): lit. 
"awakened, ? ‘roused’ ; the same verb in ver. 5, 2 Chron. xxi. 16, 
and in Jer. xl, 12, The Chronicler ascribes Cyrus’s resolve to 
4 P rmit the Jews to return to Divine Suggestion. Such is also the 
view taken by the post-exilic prophet, the ‘great. unknown,’ in 
Isa -xlv.. 13... Josephus (4virg. xl. 1. 1 f.) says that Cyrus was 
. prompted by his reading of those parts of ii Isa. in which his 
as ame -and predicted work appear : see Isa. xliv. 28, xlvi, 1; cf. 
; li, 28. The name by which Cyrus designates Yahweh= “Yahweh 
28 own God who is identical with the) God of heaven’ 








































~Papyri: seei. 2, 28, &c. It is found also in Persian i 


42. EZRA lig * #. 





















saith Cyrus king of Persia, All the i naeie of be: earth 
hath the Lorn, the God of heaven, given me; and he 
hath charged me to build him an house ih Jerusalem 
which is in Judah. Whosoever there is among you of a 
(the God whom, as seen in the sun, &c., lasa Mazdaist 


See for the title ‘God of heaven’ v. uf, vi. of, vil. 12, 21, 283 | 
Neh. i. 4 f., ii. 4, 20. This designation» occurs in the 


[1 


made a proclamation : lit. ‘ he caused (a herald) to pass tho) 
message’: the expression occurs in post-exilic literature only : 
see x. 7; Neh. vill. 15; 2 Chron, xxx. 5; Exod. xxxvi 5 nh 
See on viii. 21. 

2. Allthe kingdoms, &c. : it has been objected that Cynis 

not have used such language, and that the words are those of the 
Chronicler. But in cuneiform inscriptions Cyrus: expresses himself — 
in a very similar way concerning the principal sme 
Marduk, who had called him when king of Anshan to be © 
the world. ‘See column 12, ‘Cyrus-cylinder.’ ‘Marduk call 
Cyrus and led his hosts tow ards Babylon.’ ‘ Without ee 
bloodshed Marduk brought him to his city Babylon.’ A 
am king of the world, the great king, the mighty king,” & &c. To 
Bel and Nebo (see Isa. xlvi, 13 ; Jer. 1. 2) he ascribes much Sge4 
success. It is unscholarly and unfair to look at what is 
Cyrus and by him in the O. T. without aise contadlevile ie neta 
attitude towards nations whom he had subdued and the contem 
porary language in which he is made to express Himself ia iistrip inserip- 
tions which must have received his sanction. 3 De 

he hath charged me to build him an house: Cyrusi is) 
sented in more than one inscription aS restoring to their or 
homes or temples the local gods brought by Nabonidus to Ba 
this would involve a restoration also of the local shrines, 
also made to say ‘I left the gods of Sumer and Acead shined 
according to the command of Marduk my great lord” 

3. Render freely : ‘ Whoever there is of His (Yahweh's) people 

among you (my Persian subjects) (that is minded to de cr ae 
his God be with him and let him go up to Jerusalem w is i 
Judah, that he may build (= rebuild) the house of ~ Yahweh, 
Israel’s God, that is the God whose special abode is in f= fm th ; 

‘Whosocver . +. people: i.e. whatever exiles ‘from 
Southern Kingdom. Cyrus could hardly have in h 
have any knowledge of the Northern Israelites” 
Assyria, &c., by Sargon. His concern is with SF 






4 CS omer 


x 


his ‘people, his God be with him, and let him go up to 
Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house ‘of 
the Lorp, the God of Israel} *(he is God,) which is in 
; a And whosoever is left, in any place where « 
* Or, he is the God which ts in Jerusalem 


a ~ .- 





the exiled people of Judah and the rebuilding of the temple de- 
stroyed- by Nebuchadnezzar. Yet there is reason’ for believing 
‘that some exiles of the northern tribes returned with those from 
_ the south ; see 1 Chron. ix. 31 and on ii. 3. As ver. 3 stands, 
Cyrus commands all Jewish exiles scattered in his dominions to 
‘return. We know that the great majority elected to remain in 
their new home and were not hindered from doing so. We must 
no doubt add to the commencement of ver. 3 the words in square * 
brackets above; they occur in 1 Esd. ii. 3 (L Codex) and’ are 
_ adopted by Guthe (SBOT.), Bertholet, and others. See for s 
confirmation ver. 5. 3 

(his God) be (with him): in the parallel passage 2 Chron. 

XXXVI. a3 we have, ‘his God will be” (Lorp = Yahweh is a textual 
error) ‘with him.’ So the LXX in the latter and in the present 
passages, 

(he is God), &c.: omit the brackets and render as above. 
'Yahweh’s temple has to be in Jerusalem, for it is there He has 
chosen to make Himself specially known to His elect people. So 

_the Hebrew accents, the R.V., and the versions, including 
1 Esd. ii. 5, though the Arab. has ‘the house of the God of 
Israel, the God who is in the sanctuary’; and Luc, omits 
the phrase. If the E.VV. be adhered to, the sense is that the 

_ fhouse of Yahweh... . is in Jerusalem.’ The former is the likelier 

_ view. The worshippers of Yahweh were under an obligation to’ 

_ re-erect the Jerusalem temple, for He dwelt on Mount Zion. See 

i Ps, ix, 11, Ixxiv. 2, Ixxvi. 2, and cf, Psalms, vol. ii (Century Bible), 
- additional note on Zion. Inver, 4 and elsewhere, however, the 

_ phrase ‘ which is in Jerusalem’ (the same Hebrew words as here) 

_ describes ‘the house of God,’ and Ryle, &c., prefer this sense 

_ (retaining the brackets) here. Perhaps the bracketed words are 

_ the marginal gloss of a pious reader or copyist. 

_ 4. This verse may be thus paraphrased : ‘ Whoever is to be left 
_ behind in the place where he dwells (because he lacks the neces- 

\ Sary means, though he has a mind to return to Jerusalem), let his 

. fellow-countrymen in that place help him,’&c. Josephus (Autig. 

" ‘Xi. I. 1) says many Jews preferred remaining in Babylon with their 

ra _ Property. The verse is generally interpreted (so Ryle, &c.) to 

_ mean ‘if a Jew living in any part of the: Persian,dominion has 

Eo the ‘se but not the means to return, letvhis non-Jewish fellow- 


a hs 


Baa 








Then! rose up. the heads of { 


_ citizens supply him with all that is indispensable for the journe y 
and Neh, i. 2 and Hag. ii. 3 are adduced im support of this rende 
ing. But it is the context that decides the shade of meaning to 
be given to a word in any given place. - No king would oe 
- such a command as this, and if he did his subjects would not 
obey, Babylonians or others. One might gather from Neh. v. 1 i that. 
the returned exiles were not much helped by non-J awoke 
. is-left: in Hebrew a pass. part. such as frequ 
»a gerundial force : ‘Whoever would have to be left beh 
not helped), 
y ' sojourneth: the verb. =.to settle ina country not one’s ee 
and to Kave substantially the rights of natives : see on Ps, cxix. ae, 
(in this Series). ; 
_ place: probably = Jewish quarter, either part of 2 city in 
_ which Jews dwell together (ghetto), or a ‘part of the ie 
cultivated by them, as may be found now in Russia. n 
city were meant a suitable word, would haye 
- The men of his place = his fellow residents in the taine, ores 
_ quarter or locality. 
_ . help: the Hebrew verb is the intensive (Fi.) form of te 
verb = to lift up, and has here the sense to support, f ts be *, 
Vii, 36; Esth. ix. 3; 1 Kings ix. 11: * 
_ silver and .. : gold: to purchase food, &c., during a 
goods : camp- -baggage, articles, of” tne ee ap hin Gen ; 
necessary. The same word occurs.in vili. 21; in 
‘ xiii, 6, Guthe read the cognate word found in Esth, 
~ rendered in the E.VV. ‘swift age of pit pens 
Saddle horses; so Luc. and 1 Esd. a 
_ _ beasts, meaning animals for carrying the pest 
horses, mules, camels, asses). 1S SIS a 
freewill offering: i.c. gifts of money, ‘&e., towards tt 
. expense of rebuilding the Temple: see viii. 28; 2 Chron. XXxi. 14. 


4 is in Jerusalem, 
















not 


: a : 


oh the tabernacle in Exod. xxxv. 29}; XXEVIE Sue Tei 
understand here (with Bertholet) free willing eee 
even non-worshippers. were allowed to ee are 
in the Temple.. See Schiirer ®, ii. 300 ff. ' 

ae the act of pee the Great i in Sacrificing” pd i 


a -~ 





es eG asst EZRA 1. pT : ‘2 45 






a. * oe 
houses of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and the 
_Levites, even all whose spirit God had stirred.to go up to 
“build the house of the Lorp which-is in Jerusalem. And 6 
all they that were round about them strengthened their 





_Jiidah’ ‘and Benjamin, and the priests ‘and’ the Levites, and all 
_whose spirit/God had stirred up to build Yahweh’s house (the 

Temple) which is in Jerusalem.’ 

\ tthe heads of fathers’ houses: the word ‘houses’ is 
understood in the Hebrew, and must be supplied in English. 
The full phrase occurs in Exod. vi. 14. A Jewish tribe was 
divided into families (or clans), €ach family (or clan) was sub- 
divided into houses. 

Judah and Benjamin: according to the older tradition 
"Judah and Judah alone constituted: the Southern Kingdom (see . 
1 Kings xi. 13, 32, 36; xii. 20; but in the latter passage the LXX 
has ‘Judah and Benjamin Ys Though Jerusalem was in Benjamin, 
and some Benjamites must at the disruption have sided with the 
Southern Kingdom and been merged init, yet as a whole Ben: 
_ jamin was joined with Israel. We have here the later tradition 

“which made the Southern Kingdom, and therefore the returned 

exiles, consist of these two tribes—Judah and Benjamin : see also 

t Kings xii. 21 and 23, and Ezra x. 9. ; 

_ 1 Esd. ii. 8 has ‘ families’ for houses, which, as coming after 
‘tribes’, is more suitable and was perhaps the original word. 

the’ priests, and ‘the Levites: according to Deuteronomy 

“all Levites are priests: see p. 18. 

__evem (all); render, ‘and.’ The Hebrew.word (2) is usually 
_construed as a preposition with the MEATING ‘to.’ If kept it is 
"what is called the ‘lamed of the norm,’ defining and limiting 
_ what precedes, viz. ‘ those heads of houses (or families), priests and “ 
_ Levites whose heart,’ &c., But we should pacbably: read with the 
_ versions, including Esd. ii. 8, the conjunction ‘and’ (waw). Not 
z only the three -classes, enumerated but ‘all whose: hearts,’ &c, _ 
_ But this addition implies that of the classes named only those are 
_ meant. who were similarly moved by God. 

- __to build: i.e. here to rebuild: see Neh. ii. 5. 

the house of the LORD (God); the Chronicler’s common_ 
_ designation for the Temple: sée iii. 4, 8; vi. 22. 

6, all... round about: i. e. the Jews who elected to remain: 
"see on ver. 4. 

_ strengthened their hands: render, ‘helped them’: so 
Luc, Vulg., and 1 Esd. ii. 9, as: against the LXX, Syriac, 

_ Arabic, which render the Hebrew literally. The same phrase 
chen difference occurs in-vi. 22; Neh. vi.g. Cf. Isa. xli. 15, 
















- ~vessels of the house of the Lorp, which Nebucha 


OP eh axl ; "Sy . oe 
‘ a Nee: ’ is 
: Wert ay é 
46 EZRA 1. 7, 8. 













"5 ; 


hands with vessels of silver, with bith wt c 
with beasts, and with precious things, beside a 
7 willingly offered. Also Cyrus the king brought 


had brought forth out of Jerusalem, and had put 
3 the house of his gods; even those did Cyrus k 


vessels of silver: read and render ‘with every kind 
thing, with silver,’ &c.: so Luc., t Esd. iis 9. The diffe 
in the Hebrew is ‘slight. The vessels are not mentioned 
ver. 7. But the M:T, is supported by the other versions. ~ 
goods... beasts: see on ver. 4. ore 
precious things: the same word is found in in2 ey nen xxi. ¢ 
xxii, 23; Gen. xxiv.53. The enumeration in ver. 4 has not 
corresponding to this, and it is likely that its pepe here is due 
to textual corruption. ‘Gifts ’ is the rendering of the LXX, ‘Syriac, s 
Arabic, Perhaps we should read'and render ‘ freewill offerings — : 
according to the wealth of the person who madea comet Lenssen 
. . beside, &c.: see-above, ; a ng 
q-11. Cyrus restores the temple, vessels slen to Babylor 
Nebuchadnezzar.' mi 
_ %. vessels: these had been removed from the Jerusalem 
on three different occasions, viz. when in 597 Jerusalem es 
conquered in the reign of Jehoiakim—the most valuable, 2 Chron, sf 
XXXvi. 7; in the end of 597 when Jehoiachin was made priso el 
2 Kings xxiv, 13; and 587, in Zedekiah’s reign, 2 Kings xxv. 14f ~ 
Here the first are more particularly and perhaps exclusively | me a 
Nebuchadnezzar: see on ii. r and Esther ii. 6, oe 
house of his gods: for gods substitute ‘ god’ as in Dan. vie ” 
though the Hebrew admits of both. Marduk (Mero io tg 1 ‘ 
principal deity of Babylon, isthe one meant. On 16 S 
is mentioned: had ‘gods’ been’ intended we sho ieee! 
_ houses’ (= temples). In Dan. i. 2 the same phrase 
(perhaps i in a marginal gloss) as ‘ the treasure house of h 
i,e. a part of the temple where records, money, re wet 
served (see DB. ‘ Treasury’). See Neh. x. 38. In Luc, and 
1 Esd. ii. to we have ‘idol-temple,’ the (one) word used 
t Cor, viii, ro. In 2 Chron. xxxvi. 7, the ‘phrase is‘ ‘is. 
King’s) palace’ (not temple as the E.VV.: in Chron, th 
haykal has its original Assyrian rane ‘palace” nd no 
other). pte 2 Si 
8. Render, ‘So Cyrus, King of Persia, having: rong 


' The Jews had no images of gods to be restored as was th cas 
with other peoples who had now come under Coe : 








ei 
J 


















CEZRA‘1i 9,9) ~ ey. 
 Plisia: infin forth by the hand of Mithrédath the trea- 


"sures, ‘and numbered ‘them unto Sheshbazzar, the prince 


f forth (from the temple treasury) delivered them into the charge 


(Zit, hand) of Mithredath the treasurer, and counted them,’ &c. 
ani by the hand: in the Luc. and in 1 Esd. i. 11 a verb precedes, 
‘gave’ (Luc,) or ‘deliver’ (1 Esd.\, and it is to be restored with 


_ Guthe, &c., to the M.T., and the whole phrase rendered as above. 


Mithredath: a Persian word meaning ‘dedicated to Mithra’ 


(the Persian sun-god), The same name appears in Roman history 


(cp. Mithridates, King of Pontus). 


the treasurer: i.e, the person in charge of the treasure- 


house. See on v. 17. 
| Sheshbazzar: a Persian official, though a Babylonian by 


race, as his name (=Shamash- bal-usur, i,e. Sun-god. protect 


the. son ) suggests. Previous to the victories of Cyrus this 
- man had probably been a high official. of the Babylonian, govern- 


ment,.and so besides having an intimate acquaintance with the 
royal treasures he would have a large knowledge of Jewish people 


’ with whom? he must have had to do. He seems to have been 


appointed to execute the King’s decree in the first instance, to 
hand over moneys, temple vessels, &c., to divide the territory, and 
to make the first general preparations for the rebuilding of the 
temple. Having performed these preliminary tasks, he probably 
returned to Babylon, leaving the control of things to his successor 
Zerubbabel, who was a Jew, and in the direct line of descent- 
from David, for he was grandson of Jehoiachin, King of Judah 
Ga Chron. iii, 17). Both Sheshbazzar (Ezra v. 14) and Zerubbabel 


(Hag, i. 1, &c.) are called ‘ Governor of Judah,’ the same Hebrew 


; 











a 1 So Fried. Del., ve Hoonacker, and Sayce. E. Meyer (Die Ent- 
*. y y 


word being used. - Had our records not been so scanty, many of 
them being lost, we should have been informed of the circum- 


‘stances under which Zerubbabel, the Jew, succeeded Sheshbazzar, 


_ the Babylonian, We know that Zerubbabel was the governor in 
520, when through the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah the 
_Yebuilding of the temple was resumed. Moreover, Zerubbabel 


_ was one of those who came with the first batch, see. ii, 2, so that 


_ he was a contemporary of Sheshbazzar, and at first probably a 
_ subordinatt official, In Greek the name appears variously as 4bas- 


_ Saros (Joseph. x. 1.3); Sassabassaros, &c. (LXX) : Sabasare( Lue.) ; 


Sanabassar (1 Esd.ii. 15, &c.). Imbert, Renan, Kosters, and E. 
Meyer identify him with Shenazzar, son of King Jeconiah( = Jehoi- 
achin), see t Chron. iij. 17 f.. In that case he was Zerubbabel’s 


oe andalso aJew. Butthereisno evidence of that identity ; not 


word in accounts of either to suggest relationship with the other. 





stehung, &c., 76. f.), however, and others, reading Shenazzar 


oy peat) identify with Sin-bal-usur, i.e. ‘O Sin, protect the son.’ 


48 F FORA 1 aE 











aa of gold, a thousand chargers of bh 
10 twenty knives; thirty bowls of gold, SS. ote 


_wt 





individual is assumed by Joseph. (Antig: xi. 1. 5), and 
author of 1 Esd. (see vi. 18), and is the view held ¢ 
former times (Ewald, &c.) and, to a considerable 
present (Ryle, &c.). The tendency of later writers is to mi 
the two'names stand for two men: so Renan, Kosters, | 
Kuenen, Wellhausen, Cheyne, Meyer, Klostermann, 
Siegfried. In favour ‘of this is the fact that two names are 
both of them common Babylonian names, not. as was fo 
thought one Hebrew and the other Babylonian; and ome in 
ch, v. (cp. verses 2, 15)\a ‘distinction is clearly made. ~ Yet it 
must be admitted that the evidence is not very Geciive citer wie 
Kuenen! thinks Sheshbazzar never was governor, the: 

Stating or implying that he was being inaccurate. But this is to. : 
make history, not to construct it out of existing materials.‘ 

9. chargers: render ‘libation cups,’ the ofiginal word, oc 
curring here only in the O.T., seems to bea loan-word ‘from 
the Greek xapradXos “a basket,’ unless the Greek word comes from 
a similar one with a similar meaning in Semitie (Arabic, Aramaic, — 
Ethiopic), or from the Persian. _ Basket-shaped libation cups are ~ 
what is probably meant: see 1 Chron. xxviii, 17: they were used 
for pouring forth the drink offering : cp. Exod. xxv. 29. This is the - 
rendering of r Esd. ii. 13.. The LXX and Zuwe. translate ‘wine — 
coolers,’ referring to the shape probably. Perhaps the word has 
a’more general sense and includes also the ‘basons’ used for — 
dashing sacrificial blood against the altar. Seer Chron, xxviii. 
17; 2 Chron. xxix. 22. Snise Saha? 

knives render ‘ censers’: thé word in M.T. otcuba wéretaciy 
else, and the sense is for that reason indeterminate, though the 
root in this case has the appearance of being Semitic if not Hebrew. - 
The original text had probably the Hebrew word for *censers” 
found in 1 Kings vii. 50, 2 Chron. iv. 22: this does not differmuch — 
from the M.T., and it is implied i in 1 Esd. ii. 1g, though Syr.; ,LXX, 
and Luc. have ‘changes’ (of garment), a sense suggested bythe 
root of the Hebrew word which = to Prma-> - 

10. bowls: so 1 Esd. ii. 13 (phiale). Etymo ey (odie 
however, uncertain) suggests Sie anes ‘covered? or ‘lidded. 
vessel,’ ‘tankard’ : but the sense of the word and the purpose 
of the vessel implied are obscure. The LXX and Ze. trans~ 
literate. Rashi and Ibn Ezra say that the word has here the 
same sense as that translated ‘basons’ in 1 Chron. Fin 17. 





| Ges. Abhandlungen (Budde), 220 fe iF vty ; hiss 





> “% <7 iN 


as OEESRA AIR! Fe > 5 





capes ‘All the vessels of gold and of silver were five 11 
thousand and four hundred. “All these did Sheshbazzar 
_ bring up, when. they of the captivity were  PSOMEM up 
from’ Babylon. unto Jerusalem. 


etbnd sort: it is almost certain that the Hebrew word is 
‘a corruption of some numeral: 1 Esd. ii. 13 has “two thousand,’ 
: making: in all two thousand four hundred and ten bowls. ‘The 
‘other versions have ‘double’ (LXX, Luc.) or ‘second’ (Vulg.). 
Rashi’ and Ibn Ezra agree with the E.VV. But silver bowls 
would, as ‘such, be different from gold ones, and analogy shows 
that rio other difference is.intended. The.last part of the word 
in the M.T. agrees with the last part of the word for ‘two 
‘thousands’ in unpointed’ Hebrew, and by substituting this the 
- difficulty i in reconciling the details of the numerals with the sum 
‘total is diminished : see-below. 
‘ The numerals tn verses 9-11. If the numbers of the various 
_ vessels named in ver. of. are added together they reach a sum 
total of 2.499; but in ver. 11 it ‘is said that the sum total reached’ 
is 5,400. Many attempts at reconciliation have been made, but no 
one has commanded or deserves much’ confidence. Keil thinks 
the mistake lies in the sum total and not in the details, 5,400 being 
‘written for 2,500 by a transposition of the 5. But we have even 
then 2 for 4, and since the exact numbers are given for the items 
we should expect the same ito be done for the summing up. 
_ Besides, all the versions practically agree in the total (1 Esd. ii. 14 
has 5.469), though they differ somewhat in the items. For thirty 
| chargers of gold 1 Esdras has ‘ one theusand,’ and it has 2,410 bowls 
instead of the 410 found in M.T. and in the remaining versions. 
If these two changes are introduced into the Hebrew text we 
get the same total as in 1 Esdras, viz. 5,469. Perhaps here as 
i elsewhere the Apocryphal Fzra preserves the true text, unless we 
‘are to See in it a harmonistic recension. ' The corruption in the 
_ M.T. is ancient, since the versions except 1 Esdras follow the M:T. 
_ On the face of it the numbers in ver. 9f., as given in the M.T., 
| &c., are more plausible. One might expect-the number of gold 
| vessels to be fewer in each case than the number of silver ones. 
In i Esdras there are one thousand chargers. of both gold and 
silver. On the other hand, 2,400 silver bowls (ver. 10) are very 
| many in comparison with thirty of gold. 
‘The gap tetween chaps. t and ii. It is strange that after 
Jinforming us in chap. i in general terms of the departure from 
Babylon the historian should tell us nothing about the march, its 
pecmeneh cement; the line of route, incidents of the journey, when 




















































_ and under what circumstances. the maar eae: 
the journey lasted, &c. It does seem as though asi 
‘book dealing with these and kindred matters has been 
it is not unlikely that Ewald, Bertheau, Ryssel, Sellin, 
are right in seeing a fragment at least of that section, 
a mutilated form, in 1 Esd. i-v. 1-6, These verses are 
style of chap. i, and bear clear traces of translation from a Hebrew 
original. Moreover, in their present setting they are out - of 
place, and an evident interpolation inserted to connect the legend. k 
of the contest. between the three young men (1 Esd. iii 
with the narrative resumed in x Esd. y. 7- Darius’s name has 
been inserted in place of the original Cyrus to make the piece 
fit in with the two preceding chapters. As amended by Bertheau 
(who omits the whole of ver, 5) these verses read as follows: 
‘r, Afterwards the chiefs of fathers’ houses were chosen,to go — 
up according to their tribes, together with their wives, so 
daughters, menservants, womenservants,. and their cattle. 2. 
And Cyrus (not Darius) sent along with. them a thousand horse- — 
men, to bring them back in safety to Jerusalem, with musical _ 
instruments, tabrets and flutes. 3. And all their brethren played, 
and he caused them to go up with them together. 4, And these ~ 
‘are the names of the men who went up, according to their families, 
to their tribal possessions into their several districts ; 6. in the 3 
second year of his reign, in the month Nisan which is the bo 
month’ (or, ‘on the first day of the month’), 
A glance at the map (see opposite title-page) will show that ae 
route lay first of all NW. towards Carchemish, then turned SW. ~ 
and S., thus avoiding the almost untraversable regions of the Syrian 
and, Arabian deserts (see p. 169 f. )- It took Ezraand his companions 
four months to compass the same journey, and it would require more 
rather than less time to cover this distanee now, as the way would 
be less familiar and perhaps less safe. If we _accept the above 
addition to Ezra i it will be seen that the security and enjoyme 
of the travellers were well seen to, as the latter were accompanied - 
by horsemen and musicians. -It should be added that Schrader, 
Reuss, Ryle, Bertholet, and others object to >: Halles up ne: 
between i and ii from 1 Esdras, ‘wok 


a (see Neh. vii. 6-73* and 1 Esd. v. re ‘List oF 
"THOSE WHO RETURNED IN 538. ~ a 


After giving a description of the royal edict sicthabiaiog eiie 
return to Jerusalem of as! many of the exiles in Babylon as had 
a mind to go, it was natural to add an account o tho “who 
availed themselves of the offer thus given, their clans » town- 
ships to which before the exile their families belong to 


oe 


Temple officials, &c., who joined in the procession.’ Besides, the 
ivilege accorded by Cyrus was confined to bona fide Jews, and 
‘it is natural to think that this list was drawn up in Babylon, 
b according to older lists, so that it might be known who had a 
ge right to join the returning band, though in cases_of genuine doubt 
~ the side of those cabdbine:. the claim seems to have been favoured, 
» see verses 59-63. Notwithstanding the fact that the list belongs 
lea primarily to this period it bears marks of having been edited in 
later times. It is not to be doubted that the records of kings and 
_ their reigns, including genealogies, &c., were kept in the Temple 
_atchives at Jerusalem; and when the Babylonians conquered the 
* = city theyre likely to have carried them to Babylon to be deposited” 
Eg in the Babylonian archives. Among the precious things which 
af s returned to the Jews when he became their king, one may 
clude as many of these old records as could be found. These 
oe be helpful in drawing up the lists in Ezra ii and Neh. vii. 
The aSDNS mentioned*in this chapter belong to: the ite 
































ox. The twelve leaders, including Zerubbabel and Jeshua. Though 
_ in Ezra ii. 2 only eleven are named, it is evident from the paralleled 
Aetet in Nehemiah, 1 Esdras, and from other considerations, that 
originally there were twelve: names. Ewald and others see rightly 
in this a desire on the part of the Jews to preserve the number 
- twelve in their national organization. They were now:but two 
tribes, but they were guided and governed by twelve princes. 
_ > 2. The laymen: verses 3-35, || t Esd. v. 5-35; Neh. vii. 8-38. 
~ (2) Reckoned by clans, verses 3-19. The Hebrew phrase is 

“iiterally « sons of,’ which means ‘belonging to,’ or, ‘of the clan 
“of * Parosh,’ &c.: see on ii, 41. 

“(2 Reckoned by original (or present actual?) abode of the 
Rites : verses 20-35. 
_ 3. Temple officials : verses 36-57; || 1 Esd. ve 24-353 ais vii. 
/ 39-60. 
aes Cr) Priests: verses 36-30. 
(2) Eevites: ver. 40. 
--(g) Singers: vere 41. 
' (4) Porters (gate-keepers): ver. 42. 
ee (5) ‘Nethinim= verses 43-54. 

(6). Solomion’s servants: verses 55-58. 
5 4. Those of doubtful Jewish descent: verses 59-63, || 1 Esd. ¥. 
"36-40; Neh. vii. 61-65. 
~\(®) Laymen: ver. 509 f. 

__ (2) Priests: verses 61-63. 

Meyer (Entstehiung, p. 160) contends that those of undoubted 

" Jewish descent belonged to the tribes of Judah or Benjamin (sée 

- re 9 Xi, 3-24, -25-36) ; but there is nothing in Ezra-Nehemiah about 
tribes. In the strict sense they had long ceased to exist, ; 














5. Men and women servants: ver. 65, 1 Esd.v. 
Following the above we have a statement of th 
the persons and of the beasts of burden (verses 64 6 
enumeration of the gitts which the persons. brought with th 
‘the Temple (ver. 68f.). Moet 
This list occurs not only in this chapter atti also in the 


though, however, the sum total (42,360, see Ezra ii. 64) is the 
same in all:the three lists, there is considerable divergence | ie 
names and the detailed numbers. In no ease do the > ie} 
items when:added up reach the above sum total. If we add 
together the number given of the several classes (laymen, de, 
verses 3-65) we reach the following results; 

In Ezra 29,818. " ie o : 

In t Esdras 30,143. c CSS 

In Nehemiah 31,089. ~ i NAy 

Learned and ingenious attempts have been made to rene 
these figures with each other and with the sum total in which all 
the three accounts agree. But the disagreements are no doubt 
due'to errors of copying, easily understood and commonly met with 
where numbers are concerned. The divergences do not touch any 
matter of principle, and as the space in this series of com 
is necessarily so limited it is impossible to give here such Hel 
lists of names and numbers from the three sources (Ezra, ; 
Nehemiah) as may be seen in the larger commentaries and such ~ 
as any reader can easily compile for himself. Important diver- 
gences will be discussed in the verses where they occur. It may 
be added that the clearest and fullest comparative tables of the 
various name-lists of Ezra, Esdras, and Nehemiah are to be found 
in Rudolf Smend’s still very interesting and valuable Die Listen 
der Biicher Esra und Nehem. (Basel, 1881). The proper names are 
given, however, in Hebrew and (in r Esdras, &c.) in Greek. ~ 

The following brief general remarks are all that can be found | 
room for here :— et 

1. PersonaL Cans: verses 3-19. The clans, families, or 

houses of Ezra ii. 3-19 are subdivisions of tribes called after 
persons who are supposed to have founded them, though we 
know but little of most of the persons named, Since: occur 
in a similar order here, in viii. 1-4, x. 18-44, and in ‘vii, 
X, I-27, we may infer that they are mentioned in the order “of 
honour, though this is purely a subjective inference, and: it may 
be weakened by the fact that the places in the peat of the 
list occur also in a uniform order. 

The names of many of the men after whom aki, icles 
designated here occur in later lists (see above), from which it 
may be concluded that they are not names of persons who accom- 


panied ss ieee and his party. pA Sadie ee, 
; Sees 
» : ye “Piz tr * is 
$ Mtg Ant Yo eee 





pe ere oe 


a re ‘seems almost certain. that the clans mentioned in these 
ot chapters existed in Babylon, and even in the period before the 
exile. Weare not to suppose that all the members of the clans 
- tame away in 538, leaving no representatives in Babylon. The 

contrary was undoubtedly the case, and in favour of this is, the 
statement in Ezra viii. 13 that with Ezra the final. batch of 

the Adonikam clan arrived leaving none behind them: see Ezra ii. 
-~ 13, which says that 666 men of the clan came with Zerubbabel to 
~ Jerusalem. 

_ 2. Locart Cians: verses 20-35. Some:clans seem to have been 

designated according to their original homes, and it might be 
_ permitted to call these local clans, though the name is a new one 

and carries with it the writer’s opinion that the Hebrew phrase 

‘sons of’ or ‘men of’ a village or town has the same sense as 
— of’ a man, i.e. it denotes a clan. In ii, 27f. and in 
Neh. vii. 26-33 the common phrase is ‘men of? (cf. 1 Esd. vi, 

18-21), Guthe holds that wherever ‘clans’ are meant the phrase 

_ ‘sons of’ was originally prefixed; the phrase ‘men of’ denoting 

_the people of a district. See SBOT. 26ff. He therefore 

“attaches ii. 29-32 and 35 immediately to Ezra ii. 19, as they 

describe clans, But ‘men of’ = ‘sons of’ in Hébrew,, both 

phrases, meaning ‘belonging to,’&c. And in the verses which 

-he would remove, most, if not all, of the names are place- -names. 

It is noteworthy that the places” enumerated are nearly all in the 

_ immediate vicinity of Jerusalem. Ewald (v. 88; Germ. iv. 104) 

_held that the original decree of Cyrus authorizing a restoration 

referred only to Jerusalem and the neighbourhood close to it, the 

‘rest of Judah being held by the Edomites (see Mal. ir4.; Obadiah), 

But nowhere in the books of Ezra-Nehemiah are the Moabites 

_mentioned as foes of Judah ; and moreover, among the places are 

some not very near to Jerusalem, as e. 8. Bethel, Ai. 
ge Lay anp Crericar. From Ezra iiand Neh. vii (cf. Neh. ix. 

_ 38) it may be concluded that the lay element took, precedence © 

_ over the clerical, being named first. We have a.confirmation of - 
: _ this in the order Zerubbabel-Joshua in every instance of the two 
~ names coming together (about 12) except one (Ezra iii. 2). 
In the later form of the listsin Ezra viii, x and Neh. x mem- 

bers of the clerical class come first, suggesting that in the coursé 

of the century following the first return there was a. gradual 
increase of clerical influence. 
_. The number of Levites who came with Zerubbabel and with 
‘Ezra was relatively small, though in the time of Nehemiah some 
pat them occupied important positions (see Neh. iii. 17 ff.). 
The high-priesthood is but seldom spoken of or, implied in these 
books : See, however, P. 1i4f. 
As regards the origin and value of the lists in Ezra ii and 
Neh. vii opinions may be arranged as follows :— 


oa 






















x 



























tthe’ vivid {ifegine¥oit of the Chnodtelae Secs 
- the bases of some real genealogies to fill up the picture ¥ 
paints of the return under Cyrus and the restoration of relig 
 ifistitutions before the time of Ezra ‘and Nehemiah. 
(The Composition and Historical Value of seers. Vv 
 hausen, and others. In reply note— ~ 
(1) The ‘same list is’ used on two. different’ oecasic 
_ Ezra ii and Neh. vii, . 
(2) That in Neh. vii the list occurs as part of the Nene 
memoirs, which are ‘about the most certainly genuine portio 
the 'two books. ~ : 
2, The bulk of Old Testament ‘scholars décept the Tat a8 
authentic. 
- According to the old and the majority of modern eee 
eg and historians, the primary place of the list is in Ezra ii. ' This coe 
_ what the natural reading of the text suggests, and it is so s 
in this connexion that it is better to adhere to this view u 
= there are insuperable obstacles in the way. ‘ The list is taken ‘ 
in Neh. vii because it was needed for the purpose of nage | 
es ps “who could trace their descent from the first returned exiles. This 
_- is the view’ defended by Keil, ba Ryssel, ‘Baadiss 


Budde, &c. et 
__. Many recent ‘scholars maintain that the original pies, of the” 
___-list'is in Neh, vii as part of the memoirs of Nehemiah, and iat 
it has been ‘misplaced in Ezra’ ii, where it Has ‘no’ j con- 
is. néxion- with what ‘precedes or what follows. G Ror 
____ Kosters, Lord A. J. Harvey, Guthe, E. Meyer, and Sell Lord 
# Harvey states the case for this view fully and clearly in ‘the 
_ Expositor, 1893, vol. iii. 431-42; but his arguments do’ Hot 
__earry conviction to the present writer. - They are chiefly: I 
~ Neh. vii the list fits in well—I ‘hold it suits in Ezra ii 
_. Tirshatha in Ezra ii! 63 can mean no other than Nehen 
et is’ exactly the opposite of the truth : see‘on that verse. 
~ Moreover, the aitimals mentioned in Ezra'ii. 66 a 
_ the connéxion there implied ; they are horses; mul 
_ asses, such as would be needed ‘for the journey to ‘carry ‘persons ‘ ; 
and baggage. In Neh. vii we should have" ‘expected the m mention 
_ of animals for food and for sacrifice if ie? list: belongs ; \ 
to that chapter. 
_. In 1 Esd! v. 4 the list is given as if thode! wie 
i. Jerusalem’ from Babylon did so in the reign of Darius 
Hystaspis, 521-486). This is no doubt to reconcile 
_ ology of this chapter with the interpolated pOSERe 
pest between Darius’ s three pages (iii f,). 














#9 





EZRA 24, ey ee 55. 






a8. Now these are the children. of the province, that went 2. 
p out of the captivity of those which had been’ carried 
; away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had 

_ catried away unto Babylon, and that returned unto Jeru- 

: salem and Judah, every one unto his ‘city ; which came with? a 
® See Neh, vii. 6, &c. b Heb. Nebuchadnezzor. - 


a 1-2. Heading to the List. 
_ 1. children of the province: in Semitic ‘sons’ (the word 
here employed) is used for * people belonging to.’ The province 
_ is that of Judah (see ver. 8; Neh. i. 3, xi. 3), now a sub-satrapy of 
nee potamia (see on Esther i. t), having Jerusalem for capital and 
bazzar and afterwards Zerubbabel for governor. Here the 
feference is to natives of that province taken to Babylon by — 
_ Nebuchadnezzar, who now, as far as living, together with their 
| descendants, accepted the king’s offer and left for Jerusalem. 
: captivity: the Hebrew word, though abstract, is used for the | 
‘community of Jews in exile in Babylon, though the bulk of these 
_ now in Babylon had been born in that country. This chapter 
| tells of as many of the Babylonian Jews as came with Zerubbabel 
“in the time of Cyrus. Very many preferred remaining in their 
adopted home. Of course those who with Kosters and Cheyne 
| deny there was any return under Cyrus, are compelled to explain 
away this verse and its context. 
___ Nebuchadnezzar : RVm. ‘Heb, Nebuchadnezzor,’ which may _ 
| also in unpointed Hebrew have been the spelling in i. 7, where- 
_the e M.T. has final ar, as in the E.VV. (cf. LXX Nabuchodonosor).,. 
In the original Babylonian the form is Nabu-kudurri-usur (=‘ oe 
Nebo protect the boundary’), with which corresponds more 
‘nearly the form NWebuchadrezzar found in parts of Jeremiah and 
| throughout Ezekiel. In late Hebrew r and x often interchange 
(cf. bar=ben=son), 
_ Jerusalem and Judah = the capital and the rest of Judah, the 
former named separately on account of its importantes The 
common phrase is, however, ‘Judah and Jerusalem’ : see lv. 6, 
V. 3, vii. 14, &c. In Neh. vii. 6 the order is as in this verse. : 
_ every one unto his city: i.e. the city to which his clan be- 
longed. The words must, however, be understood freely, and with, 
| Teference to a later time Shed the account was written; what.i is” 
“stated here was actually done as far as was and became practicable, 5 
In Neh, vii. 7 and in ||1 Esdras twelve leaders are mentioned, 
| and not eleven, as here. It is probable that Nahamani has fallen 
"out of this verse through a copyist’s mistake. As to the number 
e, See remarks introductory to this chapter, p. 51. 4 








































“4 Parosh, two thousand an hundred seventy an two, T 

children of Shephatiah, three hundred seventy and two, ‘ 
5 The children of Arah, seven -hundred seventy and five. © 
6 The children of Pahath-moab, of the children of oat 


® In Neh. vii. 7, Azariah. > In Neh. vii. 7, Raaniiah. 
© In Neh. vii. 7, Mispereth. 4 In Neh. vii- 7, Nehum. 


= 


ied ' 





2. Zerubbahel : not yet governor : he is but one of twelve leaders. 
Sheshbazzar was governor during the journey and for some time 
after. The name, which means ‘ seed ’ or £ offspring of Babylon, ’is "ig 
a common Babylonian one, as the inscriptions show. He wasson: 
Shealtiel according to iii, 2; Hag. i. 1, 12, 14, ii. 2, and Matt. i 
rz, Butin x Chron. iii, 18f he appears as son of Pedaiah, brother 
of Sealticl. Perhaps Shealticl died without issue and his bai | 
Pedaiah, contracting a Levirate marriage with his sister-in-law, be- 
camé the father of Ze rubbabel, who would, however, be ee 
according to the law, son of Shealtiel. See further on v. 1 
as to Zerubbabel’s descent on x Chron. iii. 1g in Century. ‘Bible. (v4 

Jeshua: called Joshua (the older form) in Hag. i 1, &e. 5 
Zech, iii. 1, &c. In Neh. viii. r7 the well-known Joshua, son of 
Nun, is called by this (in Hebrew the shorter) name. He 
son of Jehozadak and grandson of the high-priest Seraiah : 4 
t Chron: vi. 14 f, (Heb. v. 40f.) and 2 Kings xxv. 18 ff” Thou 
high-priest, he and Zerubbabel formed with the other ten a kind | 
of cabinet of equal leaders, who had during the jotirney and ‘imme-— 
diately after its completion to decide on matters of consequence, 
subject to the supreme authority of Sheshbazzar, the governor. 

Nehemiah : not, of course, the man best known by that name. | 
Cf. Neh.i. 1. This was, and is, a common name among the _ ome 4 

Mordecai: probably identified by the author of Esther Z 
the Mordecai of that book (seé on Esther ii. 5,6). But the sidtie’4 q 
(= votary of Marduk) was and is a common one “among: Jews, 
notwithstanding its idolatrous origin. 
people of Israel: i e. the lay portion of the papitaion® In, 4 
late Hebrew the common designation for the unprofessional clase 
is ‘the people of the land.’ The word ‘Israel’ for” Judah) is — 
used to imply that the tribes to which the exiled be ong io ina 
the totality of God’s chosen people. 


viene j andy , 


3-19. Personal clans, See preliminary ikea Bsa r,s 
6. Pahath-moahb; lit. ‘the governor of Moab, 


of 





_ Diet 


“EZRA pd eli: 7h 6g 





) le oe, 
Pd Jon oaks two thousand eight hundred and twelve. The Fi 
~ children of Elam, a thousand two hundred fifty and four. 
The children of Zattu, nine hundred forty and five. The 8,9 
_ children of Zaccai, seven hundred and threescore. The ro 
children of * Bani, six hundred forty and two. The chil- x 
_ dren of Bebai, six hundred twenty and three. The 12. 
_ children of Azgad, a thousand two hundred twenty and 
two. The children-of Adonikam, six hundred sixty and 13 
six. The children of Bigvai, two thousand fifty and six. 14 
The children of Adin, four hundred fifty and four. The rs, x 
“children of Ater, of Hezekiah, ninetyand eight. The chil-.17° 
- dren of Bezai, three hundred twenty and three. The 18° 
children of » Jorah, an hundred and twelve. The chil- tg 
dren of Hashum, two hundred twenty and three. The 20 
children of ¢Gibbar, ninety and five. The children of 2s 
_ Beth-lehem, an hundred twenty and three. The men of 22° 
_ Netophah, filty and six. The men of  Anathoth, an 23 


~# In Neh. vil. 15, Branut. > In Neh. vii. 24, Hariph. — 
© In Neh, vii. 25) Gibeon. 





the founder of the clan, or-he atte? hou the clan was named, 
held the position of governor of Moab in earlier days. 
ee. Azgad : the number here is1,222; in|| 1 Esd 3,222; in Neh, 
} vii, 2 322. The discrepancy is due apparently to wrong copying. 
13. Adonikam: a part only of this clan came with Zerubbabel ; 
the part that remained joined Ezra’s party : see viii. 13. In 
| Neh. x. 16 the name appears as Adonijah. 


20-35. Loval clans: see preliminary remarks, p. 53. Local clans 
are designated “son of’ such and such a place. In ver. 27f. the 
aes is ‘men of, as it still more frequently is in Neh. vii (see 
verses 26-33). 

20. Gibbar: read ‘Gibeon,’ as in Neh. vii. 25. The modern 
' village; El-Jcb, about five miles north-west of Jerusalem, stands on 
_ the same site and preserves in a corrupt form the ancient name, 
pea ix. 3 ff; 1 Sam. ii; 1 Kings iii. 4, &c. 

' 22. Netophah: a priestly city according to 1 Chron. ix, 163 
generally identified with the modern Beit Neticf, about a score 
ij of miles tothe west of Bethlehem. 

ution (23. Anathoth = = the modern Anata, a village about four miles 


ae 






hy 








58° + EZRA 2. ogee 


24 hundred twenty and eight. The chilean of a 
25 fortyandtwo. Thechildren of » Kiriath-arim, 
26 and Beeroth, seven hundred and forty and three. T 
ichildren of Ramah and Geba, six hundred aie 
27one. The men of Michmas, an hundred twenty and 
28two. The men of Beth-el and Ai, two hundred twenty 
9, 30 and three. The children of Nebo, fifty and two. The 
si children of Magbish, an hundred fifty and six. The — 
children of the other Elam, a thousand two hundred fifty” ’ 
* In Neh, vii. 28, Beth-asmaveth. » In Neh. vii. 29, Kiriath-jearim, 5 


north-east of Jerusalem. Jeremiah was born at Anathoth (Jer. if 
I, Xi. 21). See Neh. xi. 32. 

24. Azmaveth: see Neh. xii, 29; in 1 Chron. viii. 36 the 

name of a person belonging to the house of Saul. Perhaps the ~ 
" place was named after the person. In Neh. vii it is called *Beth- — 
‘ Azmaveth.’ It has been identified with El- Hismeh, an eminence 

to the north of Anata. 
_ 25, Kiriath-arim, Chephirah, and Beeroth were Gibeonite 

cities (Josh. ix. 17) lying to the north of Jerusalem. | {aie 

26. Ramah = the modern er-Rdm, some six miles to the north . 
of Jerusalem. It was the home of Samuel fz Sam. vii. 17). wa 

Geba =the modern Jeba, some dozen miles north of Jerusalem, . 
a priestly town in the territory of Benjamin. See Josh, xyiii. 24, 
xxi. 17; Neh. xi. 31, xii. 29. fx 

27. Michmas : a fortified town in Benjamin, seven ‘miles 
north of Jerusalem, identified with the modern hill Mukhmas, 
See Neh. xi. 31. 

28. The sites of Bethel (now Beitim) and Ai (to the east of in 
are well known ; they are about one and a half miles apart and 
some dozen miles north of Jerusalem. See Neh, xi. ‘ 

‘29 ff. Guthe (SBOT.) would ‘place verses 29-32, 35 Pe, ‘4 
mediately after ver. 19, but without sufficient reason. See on a 
“Jecal clans,’ p. 53. 

29. Nebo: called in Neh. vii. 33 ‘the other Nebo’ to dies 
tinguish it from the Moabite town of the same name (Num. xxxii. 
3, 38), though the word ‘other’ is omitted in Nehemiah by the © 
LXX (Siegf.).. We do not know where the Nebo of the present’ 
verse was, though some have identified it with the modern — 
Isawiyeh, a village north of Jerusalem. The same ack: is — 
mentioned in x. 43. ; 

31. the other Elam: the Elam of ver. 7 seems coli poled F 
It is singular that the personal clan of ver. 7 has eowsacn seed 









whee 7 . 





ee _ EZRA 2. 32-36. T 69 






-and four. The children of Harim, three hundred and 32 
twenty. ‘The children of Lod,-Hadid, and Ono, seven 33 
“hundred twenty and five. The children of Jericho, three 34 
hundred forty and five. The children of Senaah, three 35 
_ thousand and six hundred and thirty. The priests: the 36 





as the local clan of this verse, viz..2,254.\. Probably ver. 7, was 
by a copyist’s mistake repeated here, and then, to try and give it 

“sense, the word ‘other’ was prefixed. We have the same 

"apparent duplication in Neh. vii. 12, 33. 1 Esdras omits the 

second mention of Elam altogether, following probably a text in 

which ver. 33 was lacking. 

” 32, Harim: another town (ver. 30) bore the same name. 

- 83. Lod =Lydda (Acts ix. 32, &e.), about seven miles from ~~ 
_ Joppa on the way to Jerusalem, now’ called Lud. It is not ~ 
- mentioned in pre-exilic parts of the O.T., but is named.in ‘the 

_ Palestinian list of Thothmes III. 
; Hadid — the Apocryphal Adiua (1 Macc. xii. 38, xiii. 13). 

_ It was a fortified city on the east of the Shephelah, now called 
_ El-khadithah, 

Ono: a village somewhat to the north of Lydda. Its modern 
name is Kefr Ana. 

_ , Godand Ono are named together, as here, in r Chron, viii. 125 : 
Neh. vii. 35, and xi. 35- Neither is mentioned ‘elsewheré in 
the 'O.T. 

_ 34. Jericho: now called ey Riha; about nineteen miles from 
"Jerusalem due east, some two miles ‘west of the Jordan, near to 
awhere that river debouches into the Dead Sea. 
35. Senaah: since the inhabitants of this place assisted in the- 
Biaileiing of the walls of Jerusalem one may conclude that it was 
‘: near to Jerusalem and five miles to the north of Jericho, as Euse- 
_ bius and Jerome held, identifying it with the Magdalsenna of their 
_ day. “See Neh. ili. 3 (‘ Has-sennah’ = ‘the place called Sennah’). 


36- -57. Temple offi ctals. Among those who returned we read of 
priests, Levites, singers, porters, and Nethinim, but no separate 
_ Féference is made to high-priests, and that probably because no 
such class existed until after the exile. (In 2 Kings xii. 10 and 
| xxii. 4, 8, xxiii. 4, the word ‘high’ is an interpolation, as the 

- context proves.) In Ezra-Nehemiah the epithet ‘high-priest’ is 









used of Eliashib only (see Neh. iii. t, 20, xiii. 28), though ‘ high- 
: priest’ for ‘priest’ in Ezra ii.'63 and Neh, vii. 65 would suit well. 
_ Dhe first undoubted occurrence of the expression ‘high-priest’ is 
ea the Books of Haggai (i, 1, &c. )and Zechariah (iii. 1, &¢.), where 
it is applied to Joshua, the ’Jeshua’ of Ezra and Nehemiah (see on 
2). % lasit omission in the present context of ‘any mention of 








-— the same events are connected with the names Levi and Simeon, — 


\ 


























60 EZRA 2. 37-40, 


children of Jedaiah, of the house of Jeshua, nine 
37 seventy and three. The children of Immer, a thousa 
38 fifty and two. The childrem of Pashhur, a oneal 
39 hundred forty and seven. The-children of Harin 
40 thousand and seventeen. The Levites: the childre 





a high-priest is an incidental confirmation of the truth of the s 
told and of the suitability of the list in Ezra ii. © 


36.39. Priestly cans. The four priestly clans of these ver 
represent probably the state of things in the days of E RE? 
Nehemiah. In the time of the Chronicler (see 1 Chron. xxiv) th 
four classes had by subdivision and perhaps incorporation ex pas 
panded into the twenty-four courses, and in the manner of this 
historian these courses are traced all the way back to David, some — 
seven hundred years before his own time! 

36. The Jedaiah clan formed the second of the twenty-four 
courses enuinerated in 1 Chré_. xxiv (see ver. 7). ; 

of the house of Jeshna: for the form of the name see on ~ 
ver. 2._ The sense and the rhythm of verses 36-39 support the — 
view of Smend and Bertholet that this clause is a late addition — 
to be rejected. It has caused endless trouble to commentators, 
no two of whom (if independent) seem agreed as to its meaning ~ TE 
retained this Jeshua cannot be the high-priest of that aie, ime 
he has been mentioned in ver, 2, but the founder of a large. class 
of priests, one which embraced the clan Jedaiah. 

37. Immer appears in r Chron. xxiv. 14 as sixteenth of * 
the courses. rs 

38. Pashhur son of Iminer according to Jer., XX. “ke “No. 
course of that name is mentioned in 1 Chron. xxiv. oa aes Grits 

39. Harim: another clan of the same name is mentioned 1D 
ver..32. See Neh. iii. 11, In 1 Chron, xxiv. 8 it is mentio das_ 
the third course. In Neh. vii. 40-42 the order Immer, ‘Pashh re 
Harim is as in the present section, but in Ezra %. 20-2 Ss 
order is Immer, Harim, Pashhur. ~ 3 


40-58. Levites and their subordinates. It is he ocan ad 
mind that the term ‘Levites’ does not necessarily or even 
probably go back to an historical personality; Levi is never 
spoken. of in the O.T. as an actual individual but once, viz. in 
Gen, xxxiv. And it is the fortunes of the tribe that appear to 
be here portrayed under the name of its eponymous head ; as is. 
also the case with Simeon in the same chapter. In Gem. xlix, 5-7 


though in this case it is made quite clear that the tribes are meant. — 
In the early period of Israel’s history the priesthood was not — 












Bet Me 28, HERA 61 


x confined to any one tribe, see Judges xvii, xix. In 2 Sam. viii. 18 


he] 


» David’s sons are priests. 

With the introduction of the Deuteronomic legislation the 
‘priesthood came to be restricted to a guild or class called the 
_‘ Levites,’ so that priests and Levites came to be synonymous, 
see Deut. x, 8f., xviii. 1f.; 1 Kings xii. 31. The Deuteronomic 

legislation, involving the suppression of the local ‘sanctuaries 
scattered up and down the country, meant ‘the disestablishment of 
_the priests who officiated at these sanctuaries. Deut. xviii. 6-8 (cf. 
‘2 Kings xxiii. 18) enacts that these priests on coming to Jerusalem 
_are to be received into the Temple priesthood and to share its 
status and emoluments. For some unexplained reason (perhaps 
so many priests were not required), these country priests were not 
allowed to act’ as city priests, though they shared the revenues of 
' the office (see 2 Kings xxiii. 8 f.). Itis in Ezek. xl. 45 f. that we have 
the earliest distinction between the priests ‘who kept the charge 
of the house’ and the priests, the Zadokites, who of the Levites 
are those ‘who approach Yahweh and minister to Him,’ From 
Ezek. xliv. 9-14 we gather that the Levites were believed to'have 
been guilty of idolatry, though the high places were as much 
Yahweh shrines as the Jerusalem Temple. As a punishment they 


_ are degraded and permitted to perform those lower offices only 


ofthe Temple which had been previously performed by foreigners, 
such as keeping the gates, slaying the animals for sacrifice, &ce. 


_In Babylon, where in the absence of the Temple no sacrifice 


could be offered, the distinction between these originally city and 
country priests would tend to be obliterated. Moreover, in the 
presence of a common foe, politically and religiously, all Jewish 
“parties were likely to cling together. One may from this. under- 
stand the reluctance of the Levites to leave Babylon for Jerusalem, 
where their priestly inferiority would be emphasized and made 
‘manifest. Hence only seventy Levites returned with Zerubbabel, 
as against 4,289 priests (Ezra ii. 36; Neh. vii. 43); and only 
thirty-eight Levites accompanied Ezra (Ezra viii. 15-19). So in 
Nehemiah’s time there dwelt in Jerusalem 1,192 priests, but only 


| 204 Levites, including the singers (Neh. xi. 10-18). 


‘Inthe P code the inferiority ofthe Levites to the Zadokite priests 


_ is a recognized: principle. In this code the latter are dignified 


S.A 
J, 







with the name Aaronites, the inferior Levites not being now 
regarded as priests proper at all. See Driver on Deut. xviii. 6-8 
and the references there given. See also DB. ‘ Priests’ (Bau- 


_ dissin), It has been mentioned by Graf and most later writers that in 


~ all the older sources used in Ezra-Nehemiah singersiand porters are 
“treated as classes outside the Levites, but that the Chronicler him- 


self includes all under the general name ‘Levites’::'see Smend, 









Listen,. 26; Baudissin, Priestertuim, 142 f., and also Einleitung, 
p. 288, where he answers Torrey ; Torrey, Composition, &c., 22 f, 


62 ‘EZRA 2 
The facts of the case may be thus briciiy Sake Tey 
r. It is in post-exilic writings of the Old: Testame 1 

first read of ‘ singers,’ ‘porters,’ and ‘ Nethinim,’ <a 

of Temple servants. if 
2. In certain parts of Ezra-Nehemiah and: of Chronic 
it-is implied that ‘singers,’ ‘porters,’ &c., stand outside th 

Levites, so that they are named separately; see Ezra tis 40-42, 

70, vii. 7, 24, x.23f.; Neh. xi. roff., xiii §, 10 ff.; 1 Chron, ix. 

ro ff. (cp. Neh. xi. ro ff.,; which is almost identical), xv. 16 ff, 

xxiii-xxvi. Kéberle and v. Hoonacker deny the above statement, — 

maintaining that in the books named abové the SAGES, = 

appear as Levites. me 
3..In other parts of Ezra-Nehemiah, and Ginna the 
Levites seem to be a general class including i in it the subordinate — 

Temple officials named; singers, &c., as in t Chron. ix. 335, Ezra . 

iii, 10; Neh. xi. 17-22, xii. 8, 24, 27; 2 Chron. v. 12, and in the r 

genealogies i in t Chron. vi. 26f. Cp. Ezra ii. 4p. a . 
The porters are never formally identified with the Levites, 

though in 1 Chron. xxxiv. 9 we read of the‘ Levites who kept — 

the doors’; but see 2 Kings xii. 9 (cp. xxv. 18), where we read 
of ‘priests who kept the door.’ Ezek, xliv, rr seems to show 
that even non-Israelites could act-as door-keepers. Butin1 Chron. 

ix. 26 the four chief porters are Levites, and in the genealogies — 

the porters are clearly traced to Levitic families, as arethesingers, — 

see 1 Chron. xxvi. 1 (the porters are Korahites, i. e. Levites ; Z 

cp. 2 Chron. xx. 19, &c.). _The Chronicler assigns to the singers — 

a very important part in the cultus; see 2 Chron. viii “14 ee : 

‘i Chron. xx. 16), xx. 19 ff., xxix. 25 ff a. 
Now in the P code there are priests and Levites and nin otheny: t 

the latter term having a broad sense which includes all the ‘ioe: 3 













7 


| 


officials. Ezekiel has but two orders of Temple officials, though — 
the Aaronites are for him Zadokites andthe Levites ae 
priests. It is under the -influence of Ezekiel’s p 
of P that in later Hebrew writings, biblical and non-biblical, me 
term Levite came to ‘have the wider meaning of all’ ie 
officials other than the’ priests. _ This is the conception 
in the Apocrypha, in the writings of Josephus, and also in'the — 
_ Talmud, which last ascribes to the Levites the Se fenetiomy 
song and watching; in the Temple. . 
Ezra-Nehemiah, and especially Chronicles; are ~ ainliadiaa 2 
elements representing different stages of religious practice and 
law.; so that it is useless to seek for one uniform set of usages in 
them. Thus in parts of Chronicles we meet with the D pee: 
‘the priests the Levites,’ see 2 Chron. v. 5, xxiii. 18, Xxx, 27; and 
Levites are made to perform priestly acts ; see a Chron, xxix. 34, &e. — 
It may be added that modern Judaism follows the P code with 3 
its implied usages, ee 










“EZRA 2. 41-43 , T ies 


shea ee 


“g esha’. ied Kadmiel, tof, the: children: of § Hodaviah, 
seventy and four. The singers ; the children of Asaph, an 4! 
- hundred twenty and eight. The children of the porters : 42 
the children of Shallum, the children of Ater, the chil- 
_ dren of Talmon, the children of Akkub, the children of 
_ Hatita, the children of Shobai, in all an hundred thirty 


~ and nine. The Nethinim: the children of Ziha, the 43 


e 


* Inch. iii. 9, Judah. In Neh. vii. 43, Hodevah. 













- 40. Render, ‘the Levites: the descendants of Jeshua and 

(also) of Kadmiel who were of the descendants of Hodaviah,’ &e, 

_ That the proper names Jeshua and Kadmicl connote families 

. rather than individuals is proved by their recurrence in Neh. x. 9 

x among those who sealed the covenant in the time of Nehemiah. 
_ The same remark applies to the other names; 

of the_children of Hodaviah: this clause belongs to the + 
descendants of Kadmiel alone; these formed a branch of the 

_ descendants of Hodaviah; see on, lil. g. 

_ Hodaviah: in Neh. vii. 43 Hodevah; in Ezra iii. 9 Judah 
(a textual error). 

_ 41. singers: the earliest mention of a distinct class of singers, 
- though, according to 1 Chron. xv. 17-24, David was the foundes , 
“See p. 11 and on iii. ro. 

the children of Asaph: better Asaphites. We do’ not 
read of any members of the Heman and Jeduthun musical guilds, — 

_ The word ‘children,’ lit. ‘sons,’ must not be understood in the 

_ Western sense. ‘Son’ in Semitic means having the property 
of, thus a A bes of wisdom’ is a ‘wise man’; or belonging to, 

_ thus ‘sons’ (children) of Asaph denotes persons of the Asaph 
~ guild, No person called ‘ Asaph’ can be traced. 

, an hundred twenty and eight: in Neh. vii. 44 one hundred 
” and forty-eight. 

_ 42. The children of the porters: read ‘porters,’ or better 

- ‘gate-keepers’: see on last verse. In Neh. vii: 45 we have 

_ simply ‘the porters.’ See vii, 7 on porters (‘door-keepers’ in 
the R. V. of 1 Chron. xxvi. 1), See general note to verses 40-58. 

Cp. Ps. Ixxxiv. ro. The ‘proper names stand for classes, not 

_ individuals. See x Chron. ix. 17 and Neh. xii 19. 

43-54. The Nethinim. We do not read of this class of - 

emple servants outside the books of Ezra- ascii except in 

1 Chron. ix. 2, The word ‘Nethinim’ means ‘given’ or ‘devoted 

to,i. €.toGod. ‘Their non-Israelitish origin is ‘suggested by their 

Swiiethe Gite ck to Jewish tradition they are identical 















Ga Fs, “EZRA 2. ar 


44 chilaren: of Hasupha, the children of . Tabbe yaoth + th 
children of Keros, the children of @Siaha, the children’ o! 
45 Padon; the children of Lebanah, the children of | Hag 
46 bah, the children of Akkub ; the children of Hagab, ‘the 
47 children of » Shamlai, the children of Hanan ; the children © 
of Giddel, the children of Gahar, thet chiNasent of Reaiah 5 
48 the children of Rezin, the children of Nekoda, the chil- 
49 dren of Gazzam ; the children of Uzza, the children of 
50 Paseah, the children of Besai; the children of Asnah, ~ 
51 the children of Meunim, the children of ¢ Nephisim ; the 
children of Bakbuk, the children of Hakupha, the chil 
52 dren of Harhur ; the children of 4 Bazluth, the children of 
53 Mehida, the children of Harsha ; the children of Barkos, - 
54 the children of Sisera, the children of Temah; the chil 
55 dren of Neziah, the children of Hatipha. The children 
of Solomon’s servants: the children of Sotai, the chil- 
:6 dren of @Hassophereth, the children of fPeruda; the — 
children of Jaalah, the children of Darkon, the ‘ceialten 
57 of Giddel; the children of Shephatiah, the children of 






. 


> Oa 
® In Neh. vii. 47, Sia. > In Neh: vii. 48,. Sale 4 
© Another reading is, Niphusim. In Neh. vii. 52, 
shesim. 4 In Neh, vii. 54, Baslith. 


® In Neh. vii. 57, Sophereth. ' In Neh, vii. 57, Penda. fey’ 


SUERTE SONS SSS 
the Levites (see Joshua ix. 3-27), but Ezra viii. 20 makes David 
their founder. Many other theories of their origin = hihi 
have been put forth. Has the word any connexion 

the name of the well-known high-priest? | 


55-58. The children of (i.e. the people who a, “aStlokaenth 
servants: mentioned in conjunction with «the Nethinim’ also 
(as here) in Neh. vii, 60, xii 3.. They are usually regarded as 
descendants of the Canaanitish tribes conquered by See ; 
t Kings v..13), but really nothing certain is: known\of 
of the Nethinim except that, they assisted the Levites. _ *Bandissin 
(Priesterthum, 142 f.) thinks the words ‘the children. of Solomon's 
servants’ is simply an explication of Nethinim, ‘even the 
dren of Solomon's servants,’ but there are two distagneot 
show that distinct classes are intended, na Yee? winds 


7 


oa See ee ee —_— ye 


Saath iat 









; EZRA 58-6 Th 65 
I Tattil, ile children of Pochereth-hazzebaim, the children ~ } 
b= ani, All the Nethinim, and the children of Solo- 58 

‘mon’s servants, were three hundred ninety and two. And 59 
these were they which went up from Tel-melah, Tel- 


_ harsha, Cherub, » Addan, azd Immer: but they could not 









3 _ shew their fathers’ houses, and their seed, whether - 


- they were of Israel: the children of Delaiah, the chil- 60 
_ dren of Tobiah, the children of Nekoda, six hundred 
fifty and two. And of the children of the priests: 61 

the children of ¢ Habaiah, the children of Hakkoz, the 


children of Barzillai, which took a wife of the daughters 


“of. Barzillai the Gileadite, and was called after , their 


. 


aie ee In Neh. vii. 59, Amoit. > In Neh. vii. 61, Addon. 


© In Neh. vii. 63, Hobaiah. 


59-63. Thosewhose claimstobe Israelites and priests were doubt- 
ful. .We have here a good illustration of the exclusiveness of post- 
exilic Judaism. Though however these families failed to make good 

_ their claims they were allowed to return with the rest, but their 
‘names do not occur in the lists of Ezra x. 25-43 or of Neh. x. 15-28. 
- 59f. Doubiful Israelites who returned. 
59. The proper names in this verse stand for places in Babylon, 
‘though whether cities, districts, &c., or where they were situated, 
we do not know. None of these names belong to persons, as’ ~ 


_ these last are enumerated in the next verse. Some join Cherub- 


\ddan-Immer ; thus making the number of places three, corre- 


Y sponding to the three clans of the next verse. 


fathers’ houses: the clans or tribal subdivisions: see 


Neh. i. 2, 18, &c. 








“their seed: their line of descent. They could not show to 
what clans they belonged or that they were truly of Israel at all. 
See Ps. xxii. 31; Jer. xxiii, 8. ‘ 


re 


_ 60. Nekoda: the same name appears among the Nethinim 


(ver. 48). Perhaps this family sought to be enrolled among the 
full Israelites. 

\ 61-63. Doubtful priestly families. Such as claimed the rights of 
oa priesthood without being able to prove their priestly descent, 

_ 61. Habaiah: in Neh. vii, 63 ‘Hobaiah,’ the difference being due 
ecaed toa copyist. Baer in his Hebrew text writes both alike, 


* Hakkoz: see 1 Chron. xxiv. 10. 






ae see 2 Sam. xvii. 27, xix, 32-39; 1 Kings i, 7, 
F 





66 EZRA 2. 62, 6x 






62 name, These sought their register. among t 


therefore “were they deemed polluted and put ce 
63 the priesthood. And the » Tirshatha said unto them, 
® Heb. they were polluted from the priesthood, > Or, governor — 





A wealthy Gileadite not of priestly family, but a daughter of © 
whom married a priest, retaining for her family the name for the 
sake of the inheritance. The descendants of such a marriage 
could not rightly claim the priestly office, 
~ 62. Render: ‘These sought for the record (lit. writings) of 
themselves among those enrolled in the genealogies; but it was 
not found: therefore were they pronounced polluted (i. e. cere- 
monially unclean) (and so) excluded from the priesthood” ° 
their register: lit. ‘their writing’ ; the Hebrew word isa 
technical one for the roll of Israelites, priests, &c., which had 
~ probably been kept in the Temple archives from the ninth cen-_ 
tury B.c. onwards. See Ezek, xiii. 9. 
among (those, &c.): not in the Hebrew, but to be restored 
here and in Nehemiah. It is hard, if not impossible, to make sense” 
of the Hebrew without this preposition, and the change in = 
Hebrew is very slight (6 for h). 3 
they (were not found) : read, ‘it’ (the writing) “ was,’ &e., as 
in Neh. vii. 64. a 
polluted : i.e. not of pure priestly descent. There is no allu-— 
sion to personal moral disqualification. Of course their-exclusion — 
from the priesthood was not necessarily final: with full proof of | 3 
the soundness of their claims these doubtful priests would be rein- 
stated; and a similar statement applies to the doubtful Israelites. _ ) 
- 68. Tirshatha: should be written Tarshatha according to — 
the Persian original word which is a passive participle = — 
‘feared,’ ‘revered’; so Meyer, Siegfried, Bertholet (not as — 
Lagarde ‘the king? s representative’). It is not an official 
title, but an epithet of respect (cf. ‘your excellence’) applied _ 
to noblemen and high officials. Here, and in Neh. vii. 65, 70, 
-it.is applied to Sheshbazzar, but in Neh. viii. 9 and x, 2— 
wrongly to Nehemiah, who is called pekhah ( = governor) in 
Neh. xii. 26. It used to be thought that #vshatha has in Persian 
the same technical sense that pekhah (governor) has in Babylonian ; — 
but no Persian scholar has ever said or thought net That 
Nehemiah is not the person here meant is proved by the fact 
that he himself found the list in which the person hist ediesited : 
“is mentioned; and besides, the power exercised by the natal 
here as regards the priesthood corresponds to the ee given 
to Sheshbazzar (see i. 8). 


. 
ee 


































7? should. TOe eat of the most holy things, till “thelee ‘ 
ood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim. The of 








hat they should not eat, &c.: that they should not act as 
sts; to these last alone was it permitted to partake of the 
iew-bread and of certain parts of what was offered: see Lev. 


am most holy things : what priests alone were allowed to : 
See Num. xviii. 9-11. 
till there stood up, &c.: these priestly claimants of — 
_ doubtful genealogy were to refrain from acting as priests until 
another high-priest should arise with power to obtain oracles. 
‘om God by Urim and Thummim: he would be able to decide 
as to the validity or otherwise of the claims put forth by these men. 
\ Urim and Thummim: an ancient Hebrew method of 
eking by lot the will of God, employed by the high-priest 
one. The following rendering of 1 Sam, xiv. 41f, based on 
a text amended in accordance with Luc., makes it exceedingly. Oe 
likely that Uvim and Thummim stand for two stones on which _ 
alternative answers were written (yes, no, &c.), and which, é 
_ being placed in a pocket attached to the high- priest’s ephod, 
one of them was drawn, the word on it constituting the answer 
- sought: ‘And Saul said, O Yahweh the God of Israel, why hast 
_ thou not answered thy servant, this day? If the iniquity be in 
Ee me or in Jonathan my son give Urim ; and if thou sayest thus : 
the iniquity is in the people, give Thummim ’ (Driver, in loco). 
We have ten other obvious examples in the O. T.. in which God 
fas consulted by lot : see Jonahi. 7 ff., &c. Many other explana- 
ons of Uvint and Thummim have been given. ' Josephus (Antig. — 
_ iii, 8.9) and the Rabbis generally identified Urim and Thummim— 
en h the twelve precious stones, which, according to P (Exod. 
_ Xxvili..17 ff.), were inserted in the high- priest's breastplate: and 
which in some mysterious way indicated the Divine Will: so 
alisch (see on Exod. xxviii. 30), But Urim and Thummim had 
_ to be put into the pocket of the breastplate, and the names 
- suggest two not twelve stones. Spencer, Hengstenberg, and 
7 thers, derive the custom of divining by two stones from Egyptian 
~ models. Some (J. H. Michaelis, Gesenius, &c.) have held that three 
stones were used, one for an affirmative, another for a negative, 
id a third for a neutral answer ; but the evidence is against this. a 
_ The Rabbis’say that in the second Temple five things” were 
» lacking which were present in Solomon’s Temple, viz. the Ark, 
the Holy Fire, the Oil of Anointing, the Shechinah, the Spirit ; 
of Prophecy, and the Urim and Thummim. It is, however, 
lied in Josephus, Antig, iii. 8. 9, and Sir. xxxvi. 3 (EV. xxxiii, 
at the high-priest had the power of Urim and Thummim 
accabean days. If Joshua were now high-priest why 


4 A pene 


n 


65) 






68 > BZRA 2 65. 
whole congregation together was forty. and: twe 
three hundred and. threescore, beside their mens 


had he not this power? Probably he ae not yet entered fu 
into office; and, in any case, it was believed immediately after the pie 
return that no one could receive Divine intimations in = igh : 

‘Urim’ (LXX ‘revelation,’ Vulg. ‘ teaching”) means ‘li ia 
Go Sym., Theod.) or ‘great light,’ plur. of intensity: 
mim’ (LXX ‘truth’) means ‘perfections’ or ‘great te 
_plur. of intensity. . The sense of the words has, howevers Det se 
variously explained. 

64-67. Sum total of the people and of the animals. On pil 
apparent contradiction between the detailsandthesum total ofthose 
who returned, see p. 52. Several futile attempts at reconciliation 
have been made, such as that the total includes members of hee: 
ten tribes who returned with the others. But either we have 
here three distinct traditions with editorial harmonizing in the — 
sum total,.or divergences in the items—a more likely ex- 
planation. The existence of three different traditions would be — 


sy 





_a confirmation of the general facts, though it would be an argu- — 


- connotation, and is especially used of the restored community. 


—/ 


‘ment against the idea that contemporary written archives were 
preserved. 
64. According to 1 Esd. v. 41 the total given includes those *, 
above twelve years old only, from which J. D. Michaelis, follow- ‘ 
ing Jewish commentators, infers that the separate statements 
refer to those above twenty years of age; he thus accounts for 
the divergences in the detailed numbers and the sum total. 
But even then he fails to account for the divergences in the © 
details, though they are slight. Others have thought that the — : 
sum total includes the women, but that the items do not So” 
- Stade and Meyer. " 
congregation: the Hebrew word (qahal) ows a religious 2 


The Jews left Palestine a nation; they returned a religious: com-_ 
munity. In later-times the w ord stood for the pious portion of © 
the people, see Ps. cxlix. 1. Stade, with a view to confirming his 
contention that Yahwism was essentially a men’s religion, says 
that the gahal Yahweh or ‘Yahweh’s congregation’? was made 
up of men alone, but that he is wrong is proved by Neh. vill, 2; 
Joshua viii. 35 ; cp. Deut. xxxi..12; Ezra x. 1; Joelii. 16: 
65. they (had), i.e. the whole congregation of ver, 64. 

'. two’ hundred: in Neh. vii. 67 and 1 Esd, v. 42 two ~ 
hundred and forty-five, a copyist’s error due tai the presence of a 
the latter number in the following verse. “a $2 


ee eS ee eee ee ee 








‘hundred — fowl: men — ee singing’ women. Their 66 


horses were seven hundred thirty and six; their 


_ mules, two hundred forty and five; their camels, four. Gy 


. hundred thirty and five ; their asses, six thousand seven 


b hundred and twenty. An some of the heads of fathers’ 68 
_- ginging men and singing women: to be distinguished from 
the Levitical guild of sacred singers mentioned in verses 41, 70. — 
The singers of this verse are professionals, such as were employed _ 
_ for marriages, feasts, banquets, and the like; see 2 Sam. xix. 36; 
2 Chron. xxxv. 25; Sir. ii. 7f.; here they -were engaged to 
relieve the ‘tedium of the journey. The mention of them is a 
"Confirmation of the truth of the story of the return. The text'has 
been unnecessarily changed so as to read ‘oxen,’ oiininee ‘and 
singing women’ as an addition due’ to the corruption? of the’ pre- 
ceeding word. There is ‘no external authority for this, and we 
have | abundant attestation of the existence of the singers of 
‘verses 41, 70, and of these of the present verse. Léhr? holds — 
that this verse proves that immediately after the exile; and pro- 
bably before it, women formed an essential part of the Temple choir. 


66. Number of the beasts: horses 736 (1 Esd. v. 43: 71,036) 5 
mules 245; camels 435; asses 6,720; so Neh. Vii. 68. 

The animals mentioned are only such as would be réquired for 
_the journey for carrying persons and baggage, an undesigned — 
“confirmation of the narrative. 

- horses: the earliest mention of the use of the horse among 
the Israelites for purposes other than war. 

_ -mules: used in Palestine at present almost exclusively for 
carrying baggage, but in Bible times they were used by the 
_better- to-do for riding purposes before the horse was so used: 
“see 1 Kings i. 33, 38, 44; Isa. Ixvi. 30. They were unknown in 
Palestine until Solomon imported them, : 

_ 6%. camels would be most valuable for the journey from Baby- 
lon on account of their ability to carry great burdens and to 
_ endure beyond most animals. 

asses would be used by the poorer classes ; much less used 
_ in Palestine than the horse at the present time, though in Egypt 
the contrary is the case. The Egyptian deserts suit the ass as oe 
ocky mountains do the horse. 

68 f. Contributions of heads of houses towards the rebilldies af 
é Temple. The parallel account in Neh. vii. 70-72is fuller, but the 
m totals of what was given do not agree in Ezra and Nehemiah. 


se 
oi ANT: Del oat: 
Rigas “3 * Das Weib in Fahwe-Religion und Phas Seid oe 







x 





t—>/. 















ui 








—e 


fo EZRA 2, 69. 







is in Jerusalem, offered willingly for the house of 
69 set it up in its place; they gave after their ability ir 
treasury of the work threescore and one thousand 


* a SLL Ft !tC<‘i‘—SO™~™~™~™~™S 
' Inthe former the heads of houses give 61,000 daries of gold, 5,¢ a 
pounds of silver, and roo priests’ garments. In Nehemiah the 

~ Tirshatha, heads of houses, and the remainder of the people give 
in all 41,000 darics of gold; 4,700 pounds of silver, and 97 priests’ 
garments. It is impossible to reconcile these numbers. Thee 
~-erepancies are due to different traditions or to copyists’ EITOMSe iy 
68. heads of fathers’ houses: see on i. 5+ < 
for the house of God .. . place: Neh. vii. 7o simply « (eaveye 
unto the work,’ the last word standing, according to Wellhausen 
and Bertholet, for the cultus (Sacrificing, &c.) only. This, it iss * 
held, is what is meant in the present verse, and the text is aceord- 
“ingly changed so as to make it agree with Nehemiah. But that 
the word rendered ‘work’ can denote temple building is proved 
by iii. 9, Hag. i. 14, &c. Perhaps, however, the contributions 
here were specifically towards restoring the cultus_ or worship of. 
the house. See on vi. 4 to set it up, Heb. ‘ to make stand,’ i. e. 
*to restore,’ as in ix. 9. f 
69. Here the heads of houses give ; in Nehemiah the Tirshatha F 
and the rest of the people give as well, though even then 
amount reached is smaller than what the ‘heads’ alone give. Ihe 
darics: a Persian gold coin of.the value of our guinea, 
deriving its name, according to Bohlenius, Ryssel (Bertheau), . 
&c.; from the Persian dara (king), and Zama (bow), so meaning" : 
: king’ s bow,’ a king with a bow being pictured on the coin: o ; 
Gesenius, Thesaurus, 354°; Madden, Coins of the Jews ®, p. 48. - 
: 
. 
’ 






Modern scholars, however, tend more and more to reject 
Persian etymology. Asa matter of fact the Babylonian word fos 
used long before the Persians came in contact with the Babylonians. 
But in any case the derivation from‘ Darius’ is now uni lly , 
rejected by scholars. This word seems to be quite distinct in 
etymology from the word rendered ‘ daric’ in vill. 27 and 1 Chron, 
xxix. 7, the latter being a Hebraized form of the word ep the - 
"present verse, from the Heb. root darak, ‘to bend the bow’; then 
darkon (the Heb. noun) = ‘ archer.’ But it is the same coin that i is 
probably meant, though Meyer thinks we must understand different _ 
coins, finding support in the bilingual inscription err and — 
Greek) found in the Pyraeus : see Entstehung, &c., 196f, : 
If the two words rendered ‘darics’ (darkemon and darkon) are 
SS 


1 dariku, used according to Prof. Sayce in the Neo-Babylonian — 
contracts for a kind of measure. The cuneiform a. tablets _ 
make dariku = ‘a pot.’ 




















b And when the seventh month was come, and the 3 
Idren of Israel were in the cities, the people gathers 
® Heb. maneh. > See Neh, vii. 73, viii. 1. 










erived from Darius there arises a chronological difficulty : how 
ould coins used in the time of Cyrus (538-529) be called after 
Jarius (D. Hystaspis, 521-486)? That the older name is used here 


d the later Hebraized name by Ezra himself (viii. 27) is evidence 
the antiquity and authenticity of the list in this chapter. 


: a certain value of silver measured by weight, containing 
fty shekels, equal to one-sixtieth part of a talent, i.e. about 46 16s, 
‘ ef '__ priests’ garments: made of fine white linen; see description 
in Exod. xxviii, 40, xxxix. 27, and cf. 2 Chron. v. 12. 


_. 70. Closing words. Readand render, ‘And then the priests, the 


_ Levites, the singers, the porters, the ‘Nethinim, and some of the 
2 ple (not being Levites)— even all Israel dwelt in their cities.’ ~ 
e 





_ See Neh. vii. 73. 1 Esd.v. 46 says that the priests, Levites, and 
day folk dwelt in and about Jerusalem, but the holy singers, 
ees and all Israel dwelt in their. villages, 


adi (1 Esd. v. Wee. Reticious Lire oF THE NATION Re 
. _ sUMED: Buiipinc anp DepicaTion OF THE ALTAR (1-6); ae 


S 


_ Founpation oF THE TempLe Laip (7-10). 


_ 1-3. Building of the altar and sacrificing on it. 
1. See on Neh. -vii. 736. 






“Sa ck toi. 1 (‘the first year of Cyrus’): see ver. 8. This month, 
‘called Tishri, is still the sacred month of the Jewish calendar, for 
in it occur the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement (10th 
- day), and Tabernacles (15th to 21st), and in later as in pre-exilic 
_ times the year began with it: see on x. 16. Howorth, following 
| Esd. v. 6, holds that it is the seventh month of the second © 
of Darius II (Nothus, 423-404) that is meant (PSBA. 1902, 
}) ; but this chronology is impossible (see p. 28), and it rests 
legend which js full of improbabilities (1 Esd. iii. r-v. 6). 
a the cities: see ii. 7o. The returned exiles were now 
a their respective homes. : ; 












_ pound: Heb. manch, Greek mina, Bab.. manu, Sumerian E 


seventh month: i.e. of the first year of Cyrus, referring 


. 


z 


< 







_ Stood ‘up Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his b 
the priests, and Zerubbabel the ‘son of Shealtiel, 
brethren, and builded the altar of the God of Is , 
offer burnt offerings th as it is written in the | of |. 





* Or; in tts place 















_. -to Jerusalem: 1 Esd. v. 47 more definitely, ‘into | 
gow _ broad place before the first gate which is towards the east” NE ‘ 
: Neh. viii. 1", The assembly took place in the open space betwe 
the water-gate (Neh. iii. 26) and the temple area. 
2. Jeshua: see on il. 2, 
his brethren: Jeshua’s brethren are his fellow membe 
the priesthood; Zerubbabel’s are the heads of houses (ii. 2, 6 
builded: in the sense of “ rebuilded’ as in 1 Kings xvi. 
Amos ix. 14. 

the altar: as the materials of the old altar were p' 
to hand, and so many workers were engaged, the altar would be 
speedily completed. As it was of the utmost importance that the — 
religious life of the nation should be resumed, the altar was set up 
before the Temple was rebuilt. é 
burnt offerings: such as were offered daily on behalf of t 

nation. Private offerings, being of less importance, had to 
as it is written, &c.: see Lev. i; Neh, x. 35-37; 2 Chron. 
xxiii. 18, xxxv. 12, where the same expression occurs. All sacri- ~ 
ficial regulations are ascribed in post-exilic writings to ss 

- musical arrangements to David: see ver. ro, and Proverbs 
Solomon (Prov. i. 1). aie 

law of Moses: not the Pentateuch. The Hebrew word here 

(torah) is never once used in the O.T, in the strictly a 
‘sense ‘Pentateuch’ which prevailSin Rabbinical Hebrew. It means ; 


aes strictly ‘ teaching,’ then ‘ prescribed laws’ (see p. 8; n.). The * 
Sia of Moses’ in Ezra, Neh., &c. = the regulations about eee 
_ the current code, believed to owe its origin to Moses : see on vii. - 
3. its base: the same words (with a very slight difference) in 
. ii. 68 are rendered ‘ its place’: see Zech. v. rt. The meaning is 
that the altar was set up in the place where the former altar stood. — 
The spirit animating the people would lead them to preserve old 
sites as well as old usages. The Massorites (g&é) anda ; 
f necessarily into the plural ‘ its bases.’ aa i 
a for fear, &c.: render ‘for fear of the peoples” of the 
* ‘tame upon them; and so (to secure Divine: 


‘ 





















e countries: ain tbyoflered burnt Otioege thereon unto’ 
ae Lord, even burnt offerings morning «and evening. 
And they kept the feast of tabernacles, as it is written, 4 


offered,’ &c, A very slight change in the M.T. (adopted by 
Bertholet and Kittel) is required for the above translation. 
‘Without some change the Hebrew gives no good sense. 

_ people of the countries : Hebrew ‘peoples of the lands’ (or 
countries’). We should, however, read ‘the peoples of the land,’ 
he plural of the second noun being due to attraction to that of the 
‘first. It is possible, of course, that there is in the Hebrew 
a reference to the various nationalities of contiguous countries 
Ay dom, &c,). Ewald was of opinion that during the exile the 
Edomites had to a large extent taken possession of South Palestine, 
but that is an unproved Buss. The phrase ‘ peoples (people) of the 
and’ or ‘ of the earth’ or ‘of the lands’ seems always to stand for 
i. heathen in contrast with Israel, ‘the people.’ Its primary refer- 
ence is probably to the native races of Palestine ; but as they were 
heathen the expression came to stand for heathen in general, an 
_ extension of meaning made easier by the fact that the same Hebrew 
“word means ‘land’ or ‘country’. and also ‘earth,’. The sing. 
people’ (am) refers nearly always to Israel. See article ‘ Nation’ 
ine Hastings’ SDB. for use of ‘nations’ in sense of ‘heathen.’ 
CE. iv. 4 (‘people of the land,’ see on), ix. 1, &c.; and also Deut. 
XxXVili. 10; Joshua iv. 243 1 Kings viil. 53, 60. 

’ purnt offerings, &c.; the regulations for the daily sacrifices 
are given in Exod. xxix. 38-42 (P); Num. xxviii. 3-8 (P), 























4-7. Before the Temple was built and regular worship resumed 
he Israelites celebrated the Feast of Tabernacles and other feasts, 
offering the appropriate sacrifices on the newly restored altar, 

4. they kept the feast of tabernacles: this is apparently at 
fiance with the statement in Neh. viii. 17 that between the 
ime of the observance recorded in Neh. viii. 14 ff. and’ that. of 

Joshua son of Nun’ this feast had not been kept; see on the 
“above passage. Even if we assume that this feast was observed 
on both these occasions it is strange that nowhere else in Ezra- 
“Nehemiah and nowhere at all in the other historical books of the 
0. T. do we read of the actual carrying out of the Jaws command- 
Ing. the feast (see on, Neh, viii. 14). The authenticity of the 
“present passage is denied by making it an invention of the 
Chronicler, who had a wish to represent the returned Jews: as 

aithful to ‘the law of Moses,’ See p. 14 f. 
1% - Originally the three great feasts were agricultural, and had 
| nothing to do with the events with which in later times they came 
Merb connected ; they were simply agrarian feasts during which 


ep 


eople rejoiced at the close of the three harvests (barley, 















, 


» 





























5 to the ordinance, as the duty of igs by cay quire 
afterward the continual burnt offering, and the ¢ f 


wheat, and fruit of various kind). The Feast of Tabe val 
an autumnal holiday when the people gathered from 
towns to great centres, and living in booths enjoyed 
when the year’s hardest work was over. This feast came 
religious, commemorative of the dwelling in tents in the wilde) 
only with the inauguration of the Deuteronomical legislation 
-as a part of its centralization of worship, made it obligat 
keep the feasts at Jerusalem. oe 
as it is written: see on ver. 2. The reference seems to 
be to the law recorded in Num. xxix; 12-34 (P), according to” 
which the number of bullocks to be sacrificed ‘on the I 
days diminished, beginning with thirteen on the 15th of 
and ending with seven on the 21st and closing-day of the 
But ‘the various codes do not agree. See G. B. Gray, Wu 
Pp. 402 ff. (‘a scale of public offerings’). No details of the 
in which the feast was kept are given in the present chapter. 
ered: the verb translated ‘kept* is the technical one 
*to offer’ (a sacrifice) ; its force is continued in ‘the present clause — 
and also into the next verse, so that the italics are not nel 
should be omitted. 
by number, &c.: see the above note. 
5-7. The offering of sacrifices of various hinds resumed. 
5. afterward: after the observance of the Feast of Tabet 
the sacrificial system suspended since the destruction ¢ 
Temple in 586 8.c..was restored. The nation so long relie p10U 
dead was beginning to re-live its old religious life. : 
the continual burnt offering: the daily ‘cata: — 
Exod. xxix. 38-42; Num. xxviii. 8; Ezek. xlvi. 15. In pi 
times the daily sacrifice consisted of a whole burnt offering . 
morning and a meal offering in the evening (see 2 Kings xvi 
ef. 1 Kings xviii. 29, 36). Ezekiel requires both these in- 
_ morning; Neh. x. 33 (34) assumes that both were offered each 
_ day, though whether in the morning as Ezek. xlvi. 75, or cae 
and evening according to the old law, cannot be determined. 
later times (see Num. xxviii. 8 (P)) the law required a 
offering and also a meal offering both morning and é 
though the meal offering was subordinated to the other, as w 
the drink offering which (last) was never offered alone. — 
ix. 5 and on Neh. x, 34 (33). Py 
continual means in this connexion ‘daily,’ 
and the offerings of: since the construction in 
implies the presence of these words the italics are ui 


, aoe 





1¢ LorD was not yet laid. They gave money alsountoy, 


“mew moons: the observance of this feast (the first day of the 
nth) is not enacted in any of the older codes (JE, D, H) and 
“in P only in Num. x. ro and xxviii. rr-15. It does not even find j 
mention in the list of feasts in Lev. xxiii. Nevertheless, thatthe 
moon was in éarly times observed as afestal day andasaday 
Sacrifice is proved by Amos viii. 5 ; Hos. ii. 1x (13); Isa. i. 13; 
Sam. xx. 4 ff.; 2 Kings iv. 23. ptt 
_In x Esd. v. 52 the Sabbath offerings are mentioned before 
ose of the new moons: so 1 Chron. xxiii. 31; 2 Chron. ii}4g. 
_ Set feasts: probably here as in Neh. x. 33, 2 Chron. viii. 1g) 
he three great annual pilgrimage feasts are meant, though the — 
_ expression has a-wider sense in Lev. xxiii. 2 (see following verses 
here they are enumerated). Pare 
 freewill offering: the aforementioned offerings were made 
y the community and were compulsory. But each individual 
as at liberty to make private offerings on the great feast days 
see Deut. xvi. to, 16 f.) or on any other occasions (see Num, ~ 
tix. 39). See Lev. i-iii, where they are called ‘gifts’ (‘corbans,’ 
et vii. II), a word however which in other places includes 
all kinds of sacrifices, bloody and bloodless. a te 


(i 


- Sacrifice began to be offered immediately the altar was setup, = 
- i.e. on the first day of Tishri, the Day of Trumpets (Num. RINT) es 
é regular daily offering was not resumed until the Feast of « 
rnacles had been held, i.e. after the 22nd day of the month, 

e weeks later: see ver. 5. £6 


. Preparations for the rebuilding of the Temple.. See the much _ 
Her account of the preparations for building Solomon’s temple 
1 Kings v. 7 ff. (Heb. 2: ff.) and 2 Chron. ii. 11 ff. Some say~ 
it the present verse is an invention of the Chronicler’s, based on 
older accounts of the building of the first Temple. But there are 
Herences as well as resemblances ; and it shouldbe remembered 

he example of Solomon was likely to influence the conduct ase 
bbabel and Jeshua.. ° - Pet % 
mey: the native workmen received money ; the Sidonians 
yrians were paid in kind (wheat, wine, and oil); see _ 

1 age a APNG iad oe 


= 



























2s 


_» cedar trees from Lebanon to trie sea, unto Jopps 


8 Now in the second year of their coming unto 










the masons, and to the carpenters ; 2 at, and 
‘and oil, unto them of Zidon, and to them of Tyre 


- to the grant that they had of Cyrus*king of Persia. 


house of God at Jerusalem, in the second month, beg; 
Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua the sot 


® Or, hewers 























masons: rather ‘stone-cutters,’ i. e. those who cut the: 
into proper shape for building: not builders or ‘masons. 
does the word stand for those who quarried the stone 
below the city). i 

carpenters: i.e. those who cut the wood into the : 
required for the building ; so the Hebrew. 

grant: the Hebrew word seems to mean ‘ permission,’ | 
reference being to the permission given by Cyrus to rebuild 
Temple and his promise of help. 


8-13. Foundation of the Temple laid. Though the work 0 
- rebuilding was commenced in real earnest, it seems to have b 
speedily stopped, not being snap ge until the fo re 
Darius Hystaspis, i.e. in 519 B.c.: see v. 2. Even the fe tion 
Stone was so incompletely laid chal the whole: proceeding had to” 
-be gone through sixteen years later when the preaching of Haggai _ 
and Zechariah moved the people to set about the task of rebuilding: © 
‘see Hag. i. 15. There is no need to assume that there is a con- 
tradiction. The first foundation-stone laying was fo’ nd 
incomplete ; at the end of sixteen years those hostile to the under-— 
taking might have undone what had been done. “Besides, the 
Hebrew verb (ver. 10) translated ‘to lay the foundation’ “must. 
be understood to mean to start a new building de novo. ' Tob es 
rebuilding an old structure would meet the requirements of the case. 
8. the second year: i.e. after the return; this would | 
probably the third year of Cyrus’s reign over Babylon, - = 
the house of God, &c. (see ii. 68): i.e. the, place where the 
Temple had been, was to be, and where much of the old buildir gz 
must have remained. pier 
second month: i. e. Iyyar. ORE been 
began: i.e. the work of rebuilding the Temple,jawhat! they 
began to do is suggested by the context. &e.) join 
the verb to and appointed, rendering ‘began to Reig: / 
Hebrew allows this. >) 
Zerubbabel, &c.: see on ii, 2 and also on v. 2. 
munity Bank appointed the Levites as overseers of the 





Le ila ay all they that were come out of the cap- 
ity unto Jerusalem ; and appointed the Levites, from 
senty years old and upward, to “have the oversight of 


* Or, set forward the work 


iests, and Levites, and the rest, i. e. the lay portion. 
~ Jeshua: see on ii. 2. 
_- the rest: i.e. all except Zerubbabel and Jeshua. 
and appointed: render ‘so they appointed.’ The verb 


€, as in 2 Chron. vill. 14, xxxi. 2, &c. : see on verses Q, To, 
: e Levites: very few of them returned according to ii. 40. 
1ey would therefore not be too numerous to act as super- 
iutendents of the various departments of the work. 
from twenty years old and upward: service agreeing a 


~ David, though it is probably what obtained in the writer’s own 
- day. "Num. iv. 3 (P) gives the years of service as from thirty to 
‘fifty, though after that a Levite could help his brethren. Num. 


is no contradiction between the present verse and Num. iy. 3. 

ee to have the oversight of: not in the LXX (except Luc.) 
"which has simply ‘appointed . .. over the work,’ &c. The verb 
- translated as above is cognate with the word often found in the 
__ titles of Psalms (R. V. Chief Musician), These Levites must be 


i ~ understood as having the oversight only as regards the religious 


use of the structure—sacrifice, the laws of holiness, &c. They can 
' hardly have had the ability or responsibility of seeing to the 
pbuiliting, carpentering, é&c., as such. 
9. What the writer in ‘this verse aims at saying is. that the 
evites accepted the task imposed on them ; but as it stands the 
~ verse does not say that, or indeed anything that is intelligible in 
the light of the text. Probably the Hebrew should be altered 
fightly and then translated as follows: 


*Then Jeshua and his descendants and brethren, Kadmiel and ~ 


his descendants (who were) descendants of Hodaviah, their 
eendants and their brethren, (yea, all the) Levites, accepted 

Be cpcintment, superintending the workmen (lit. ‘the doers of 
work 2. at the house of God.” 





: work of the house of the Lorp. Then stood Jeshua 1 


msisted of the civic (Zerubbabel) and religious (Jeshua) leaders, ~ 


to ‘cause to stand’) is used elsewhere also of appointing to 


~ zx Chron. xxiii, 27, which refers this arrangement to the time of — 


_ Vill. 23-26 (P) fixes the age at from twenty-five to fifty. The 
different figures represent the customs of different times. There 















- 


AO 






78 3 omer. EZRA 3. fo. 
_ with his sons.and his brethren, Kadmiel and his 


sons of 8 Judah, » together, to have the overs 
workmen in the house of God: the sons of 


pets, and ‘the Levites the sons of Asaph with srt | 


® In ch, ii. 40, Hodaviah., > Heb. as one. - 
© According to some MSS. and ancient versions, the priests sod J 
ay 
Jeshua...his brethren: i.e. Levitical families connec 
by blood relationship with that of Jeshua (Joshua) and called 
that name, though not claiming descent from one ancestor, pate = 
Judah: read (with most moderns) ‘ Hodaviah’: see ii. 40. A 
Hebrew words could be easily confounded, especially as the first — 
consonant of Judah is identical with the last of the preceding ae 
But Neh. xii. 8 shows that there was a Levitical clan Judah. 
Henadad: this name‘is here probably due to a marginal » 
gloss. First an editor would substitute in the margin * Hodaviah’ 
for ‘Judah.’ This found its way into the text alongside of = 
A later editor, thinking of Neh. x. 9, substituted He, 
We have really in this verse but two Levitical clans, those 
enumerated in il. 40. es 
their sons and their brethren: i.e, the ee ; 
brethren of Kadmiel and Hodaviah the Levites, Render,‘ (even all); 
the Levites’: this sums up the preceding. a 
10. Note that in this verse Levites seem to act as musicians 
in the oldest sources of Ezra-Nehemiah the latter are a clan apart. 
See pp. 16, 61 f., and on Neh. xi. 17. $e 
builders: i.e. the workmen. i aoe 
they set: if we retain the M. T. we must take the constrv 
tion to be what is called that of the indefinite subject, which is 
generally best Englished by the passive ‘were set,’ &e. 
it is far better to follow the LXX (including Lue.), Vulg. Syr., 
1 Esd. v. 59, and at least thirteen Hebrew MSS., and to read Se 
intransitive form of the verb, changing vowels only which were 
originally not written: so ‘ they stood’ in the sense ae 








forward” as in Ps. cvi. 23, Neh. xii. 40, and Ezek. xxii. 30. 
The priests came forward to perform their duties clothed in their 
robes of office, and with trumpets, ne 
trumpets blown by priests alone: see Num. x. Bf and 
1 Chron. xiii. 8; cf. Neh. xii. 35, 41. 
cymbals: played on by Levites: see Neh. xii, 913 5 2ch 
v. r2 fi. mn 


Hy, 








' And they sang one to another in praising and giving 
+ thanks unto the LorD, saying, For he is good, for his 
- mercy endurefh for ever toward Israel. And all the 

_ people shouted with a great shout, when they praised the 
: Lorn, because the foundation of the house of the LorpD 
~ was laid. But many of the priests and Levites and heads 

‘of fathers’ Aowses, the old men that had seen * the first 
bos ouse, when the foundation of this house was laid before 


/ . Or, the first house standing on its foundation, when this house 
was before their eyes 









David: see on ver. 2. In post-exilic times David was 

- credited with having originated the musical arrangements of the 
“Temple: see 1 Chron. xxv. 1 ff. and 1 Esd. i. 5, and cf. p. II. 

ia 11. And they sang one to another: Jewish music lacked 

harmony and counterpoint, but in some degree it made up by 

a large measure of antiphonal singing, one portion of the choir 
singing one part of a verse, the other singing the remainder: see 
Ps. exxxvi in which each verse has two sections. See Psalms, 
vol. li. in this series, p. 26, and the references there given. The 
Hebrew word here rendered ‘sang’ means ‘ answered,’ and it is 
so translated in x. 12; Neh. viii. 6. 

_ _ praising: the Hebrew word is that in hallelu -yah, ‘ praise ye 
tt Yahweh) : for its etymology see W. R. Smith (Rel. Sem., 
431 f.). 

- giving thanks: the Hebrew word denotes primarily stretch- 
_ ing forth the hands, as an attitude of worship. See on x. 1 for 
other senses of the verb. 

for his mercy, &c., quoting the words of the refrain: see 
z Chron. xvi. 4; 2 Chron. v. 13, vii. 3, xx. 213 Jer. xxxiii. 11; 
Ps, exxxvi. Many think the latter was sung on the present 
_ Occasion, but there is no proof of that. 

mercy: render ‘lovingkindness.’ 

12. the old men: the word rendered ‘elders’ in v. 5 and else- 
where, but here having its literal not its official signification. 
From 586, When the Temple was destroyed, to the present year 
6, there is but a space of half a century, so that many who 
witnessed the present events must have had vivid remembrances 
_ of the appearance of the old Temple. 
a _ when the foundation of this house, &c.: this clause must 


are 


eae with what precedes, though ‘the Hebrew is peculiar 
even inaccurate. 





| be joined to what follows and not (as the Hebrew accents - 


oe Tat EZRA 3. 11, ES - . 19 


Ii 


12 


80 





noise of the shout of joy from the noise of ina 
ing of the people: for the people shouted with a loud 
shout, and the noise was heard afar off. eee 








wept, as they saw “the contrast between what of the new 
Temple was before their eyes and the complete ee 
Temple as memory recalled it. 

shouted aloud for joy: not only did the young and 
middle-aged rejoice that they were to have a Temple like that — 
of which their fathers had spoken and sung, but many of the old 
men, even those who wept, must have shared the gladness of 
the occasion. 


IV. (1 Esd. v. 66-73). — 


1-5. Jewish REFUSAL OF THE SAMARITAN OFFER OF Co- 
OPERATION IN THE BUILDING OF THE TEMPLE. ‘ 


It has become quite the fashion to treat this section as the 
fabrication of the Chronicler, who wished to make his fellow 
countrymen appear as religious as he could from the time of their 
reaching Jerusalem, and also to account for the hostility between ~ 
Jews and Samaritans. Even E. Meyer, a defender of the general 
authenticity of Ezra-Nehemiah, falls in with the prevailing fashion 
when writing on these verses (see Entstehung, 119 fi.). Yet the 
grounds on which the authenticity of this section has been 
denied are almost wholly @ priori and subjective, and admit of ~ 
being satisfactorily met. 3 4 

It has been asked, How could Cyrus, who authorized the return 
and also the rebuilding of the Temple (see ver, 3), now conSent to. 
have the work hindered? In reply it may be said that Cyrus ~ 
might have been wholly ignorant of what action his subordinates 
had taken, for we know that about this time he had much on his — 
hands, in the way of protecting lands he had conquered and in the ~ 
administration of his vast dominions, Moreover, there might 
well have been reasons for a policy different from that pursued — 
when the Temple-builders were yet in Babylon. 

In Hag. i. 6-11 the delay in the work of Temple rebuilding is 
ascribed to the indifference or unbelief of the people, but here to 
the opposition of the Samaritans : both causes, it is said, could — 
not be at work; but why? It is not said in ver. 4 f. that through 
the action of the Samaritans the work was stopped, but only that 
its progress was checked. We are told in iv. 24 that the work 
ceased, but we are not informed as to al] the causes of that. 
When the exiles returned they had much to de in a 


| 
- 
i 
4 
; 




































: ALS + ipo ; %y ati: 
ng and rebuilding houses, dividing’ and cultivating the land, — 
izing the community and the like. The building of the 
ple was not the only task that devolved upon them. 
n Schrader’s rejection and subsequent acceptance of the state- — 
regarding Esar-haddon in ver, 2 see on that verse. Meyer 
tehung, 124 ff. ; cf. Geschichte, iii. 192), though a defender of 
ts of Ezra-Neh. which are now regarded by many scholars as un- 
orical (the Aramaic documents, &c.), is very decidedly of opinion 
t these five verses are an invention of the Chronicler and unhis- 
cal. He thinks it extremely unlikely that the Samaritans, at 
| time the more numerous and important party, should seek 
sligious alliance with the Jews, and still more unlikely that the 
sws should have refused so flattering an offer. On the contrary, 
‘careful consideration of all the facts will make very likely what 
syer declares to be unlikely. Why should not the Samaritans 
to be allowed to join the Jews in the great task of restoring 
Temple? These Samaritans were all of them Yahweh wor- | 
ppers, though their Yahweh worship was disfigured by some — 
eathen accompaniments (e. g. representing Yahweh in the shape 
of their ancestral deities ; 2 Kings xvii. 29) ; Josiah (d. 609) had 
suppressed the high places in Samaria as well as those in Judaea 
2 Kings xxiii. 15 ff.), and compelled the Samaritans tocontribute __ 
owards the upkeep of the Jerusalem Temple (2 Kings xxiii.9). 
| It may be gathered from 2 Chron. xxxiv. 9 and Jer. xli. gff. that. 
_ atleast some Samaritans worshipped at the Jerusalem Temple, and 
1ese were genuine Samaritans, not renegade Jews. In matters 
of religion the Samaritans had come to regard the Jews as their 
eriors, and it is to this that we are to ascribe the fact that at ~ 
later time the Samaritans took over the Jewish law-book (the - _ 
’entateuch), making it their own religious code. 
On the other hand, Meyer infers from Isa. lvi. 1-8 that the ~ 
ws of this time were broad-minded, ready to welcome into their 
community eunuchs and foreigners. But most moderns (Duhm, ~ 
Cheyne, &c.) think that this declaration belongs tothe ageof Ezra and 
Nehemiah, when the Jewish community was admittedly exclusive. 
No scholar dates this utterance in the period immediately after the 
rn, though many (e.g. Marti) ascribe it to the time just before 
exilesleft Babylon. Moreover, Meyer has forgotten that Ezekiel’s 
ewish code (Ezek. xl-xlviii), which he admits to be a very 
narrow one (Geschichte, iii. 182), was drafted during the exile and 
ed the standard of the post-exilic religious life of the Jews. — 
es, if, as Meyer holds (Entstehung, 239), Ezra hated the 
ritans on account of their idolatry so much as to wish to 
them out of Jerusalem, why should not Zerubbabel, acting 
Similar spirit, refuse co-operation with the Samaritans now ? 
t would be equally easy to answer the statement of Marquart 
enta, 55,57) that the Chronicler invented the statements 
it c 


Beane ig Pete cele che Seas ie 
a a ss a > andl 2S ” ot = oa) rT 


Sak ct pee Bae: 










heard that the children of the ‘capil builded | 
2 unto the Lorp, the God of Israel; then they dre 
__ to Zerubbabel, and to the heads ee fathers’ or 
said unto them, Let us build with you: for we seek y 
God, as ye do; *and we do sacrifice unto him er 

































treatment of the Samaritans, See an able by 
Wrederherstellung, 77 ff. 

1, adversaries: the Samaritans, who inherited, the envy 
ill-will of the Israelites towards the Jews. They do not: 
describe themselves when (see ver, 2) they speak of the 
as having been brought from Assyria, for though that is true. 
the rulers of the Samaritan population after the fall of 
_ Northern Kingdom,.yet the bulk-of the peopleswere Israelites. 

_ An inscription of Sargon’s says that only 27,000. Samaritans | were — 
removed ; over 200,000. Jews were deported into Babylon. _ 

Judah. and Benjamin: the later designation for the 
‘Judah’: see oni. 5. 

children of the captivity : :lit. ‘sons of t&e, S01. 16, 
-words ‘son.of’ denote in Semitic one having the quality ann: 
a ‘son of wisdom’=‘a wise man’; ‘sons of the captivit 
= captives. Here of course the expression means ‘those wl 
had been captives.” See, on ii. 1, where, the abstract ‘ captis 
= captives,’ according to a common usage in Hebrew, 

builded; Heb. ‘ were building.’ : 
_.2, to Zernbbabel: add ‘and to Jeshua’ with Luc, 
68. Cf. ver. 3. gta 

seek: the Hebrew word is used of consulting. Yahweh with 
a view to receiving an oracle : see 1 Chron, x. 14, &e. on i 

The word came to be used then of worshipping and acknow-— 
ledging as God. Here the tense denotes what is customar, 
‘We are in the habit of seeking,’ &c,, ie. ‘We are Yah 
worshippers as much as ye are.” a» 

. ‘we do sacrifice unto him: the M.T. has’‘ not? , 
him’ ;, but these two Hebrew words, because pronounce 
are often confounded through copying from dictation: see 
xxi, 8, &c. The Hebrew text means ‘we do not sacrifice 
idols),’ but the verb rendered: sacrifice has never by ats 
sense ‘ to sacrifice to idols,’ . The versions, inclndiaie 

‘unto him’ as the E.VY, - 









e head of fathers? houses Be Israel, said unto them, Yeo 
ave nothing to do with us to build an house unto our 
‘but we ourselves together will build unto the Lorp, | 
God of Israel, as ay Cyrus the king of Persia hath 
imanded us. Then the people of the land weakened res 
hands of the people of Judah, and @ troubled them in 


“thei purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Bersias even — 
il the reign of Darius king of Persia, [R] And inthe 6 
. ae ® Or, terrified 





r 
; 





















tries and districts in this way. . There does not seem the 
, htest reason for. reading Sargon. or Ashurbanipal here (see 
_ COT. ii, 61, where Schrader defends the genuineness of the 
ame here after denying it in an.earlier writing), We read of other — 
deportations i in 2Kings xvii. 24 ff. (by Sargon), and in Ezra iv, to 
-(Osnappar = Ashurbanipal). ice 
8.as king Cyrus, &c.: see i. 3. Cyrus’s decree had 
_ reference to the Jews in exile, and to no others. 
4, the people of the land: i.e. the adversaries of ver. x (see 
iii, 3). In post-biblical Hebrew the phrase means the‘common 
ople,’ ‘the uneducated’ in particular. There may be hereatouch 
rony—‘these ignorant Samaritans’: see iii. 3 and ix. 1; ch — 


‘weakened the hands: lit. ‘made thehandshangdownloose’— ~— 

__ that is, they took heart out of them; discouraged them: see Neh. v. 9- 
troubled : Heb, (though, the "Hebrew letters have been acci- 

tally mixed) ‘they frightened them as regards building,’ i.e. 

y terrified them so by threats that they were afraid to go on 

ith the work. ; 

5. hired counsellors, &c.: paid men who had influence at the tee 

rsian court and skill in speech to plead their cause before the 

King and his ministers; cf, Neh. xiii. 2.. The verb translated to 

ustrate means lit. ‘to break,’ and occurs.also in Neh. iv. 9. . ; 

the days of Cyrus). ..until the reign of Darius, i.e. 

itteen years, made up as follows:; five (last) years of Cyrus, 

en years of Tent oa sy seven months of Pseudo-Smerdis, two 






























IV. 6-23 (1 Esd. ii. eee 
el earrion TO THE BUILDING oF THE City WALLS A S 
BEFORE THE First ARRIVAL OF NEHEMIAH, OR / 
ARRIVAL AND DurINnG HIs WorK. 


This section has strayed from its proper place in Nehem 
more probably from its place between Ezra x and Neh. i. — 
nothing to do with the building of the Temple, which had been com= 
pleted before Ezra’s arrival: it is of the restoration of the walls 
that we here read (see ver. 12). In a similar way Neh. vii. 73” 

-to x belong to the life and work of Ezra and not to those of Ne 
miah, and must be placed in what we call ‘Ezra’ (see on 1 
passage). It is marvellous, remembering that books in those tim 
consisted of prepared skins written on and then attached, thai 

_ more of our O.T. is not dislocated than is the case. 

Apart from the fact that we read in these verses of the r 
of the walls and not of the restoration of the Temple, chronol 
considerations show that we have here a narrative that is out o 
its true connexion. In ver. 6 we read of King Xerxes (485 
and in verses 7-23 it is of his successor Artaxerxes ‘Congiman, 
465-423) that we read. Then in ver. 24 we have mentio RS 
King Darius, by whom we are certainly to understand Darius — 
Hystaspis (521-486). Ingenious and learned attempts have ‘4 
made to account for this chronological anomaly, none of them so 
satisfactory as the explanation given above, which is that of _ 
many recent scholars (Kuenen, v. Hoonacker, Kent, &c-). It should ; 
be said that all external evidence, including that of 1 Esd, ii is. : 
against transferring verses 6-23 to Nehemiah. 

Where are we to place the incidents of Ezra iv. 7-23? Pr 
bably, with Meyer and v. Hoonacker, between Ezra x and Neh. 
and not with Kent after Neh. vi, since in the latter chapter we! 
of the completion of the walls. The sad condition of Jerusalem 
and of its inhabitants which Neh. i. 3 implies seems to be that 
which followed upon the royal edict in Ezra iv. 21ff The sur- 
prise and grief of Nehemiah on hearing the report of Hanani, his” 
brother, must have been due not to his learning for the first time 
of the royal edict —of that he could not but have had knowledge— 
but to his hearing of the cruel way in which that edict was ca’ 4 
out. It was of some recent calamity that Nehemiah heard, and» : 
not, as Keil, Schultz, &c., held, of the destruction of Jerusalem in- 
586 by Nebuchadnezzar. ‘This latter could have been no news to — 
‘Nehemiah, not even the manner and results of it.. Graetz and — 
Kosters deny the historicity of the section, mainly because (sec — 
ver. 12) it implies that there was a return of exiles before ie 
_arrival of Ezra and his companions ; but see Introd., p. 23 ff. ~ 

According to the present text (M.T.) of verses 6ff., three let 
of complaint are forwarded to the Persian court. (x) One iss 
to King Xerxes—by whom we are not told, though 1 







Pteen ul of abscess, in he ean of his reign, wrote 
Ss #8 Or, Xerxes Heb. Ahashverosh. me 


ent by Mithredath. (3) Rehum, &c., forward a letter—the third — 
to be mentioned in verses 6-8. In r Esd. ii. 16 the first letter 
(er. 6) is ignored, and the senders of 2 and 3 are united and 












‘commander, and Shimshai, the recorder (the names differ con- 


- showing that there is some confusion. In the original text men- 
~ tion was made, perhaps, of two letters: (1) one sent in the reign 
- of Xerxes (ver. 6); (2) another sent to Artaxerxes from members 
_ of the Samaritan party at Jerusalem (Mithredath, &c.) through 






to them that the king sends his answer. Probably, however, we 
_are with 1 Esdras to omit ver. 6 (see on), so that we have but one 
__ letter sent to Artaxerxes I, and not two. This one letter was 


sent from Jerusalem by Jewish leaders to the Persian official at ~ 
_ Samaria, to be forwarded to the king: see on verses 8-Io, 


4 


Klostermann!, followed in part by Sellin, holds that in this 


. Correspondence it is Tabeel and his companions who write in the ~ 


hame (‘Bishlam’ is so read) of Mithredath to plead with the 
king to allow the Jews to go on with their work of rebuilding, 


_ adding the incidents mentioned in v. 1-vi. 18 to show that in the 


_ past the charges brought against the Jews had been found base- 
__ less, as the charges now made are likely to be. This view of the 


~ the Persian officials, Rehum, &c.,; who resided at Samaria ; it is" 


“understand the Samaritans to be the senders. (2) A second is ~ 


seni in the Greek of the Apocrypha) are mentioned twice, ~ 


’ 


_made the senders of one letter between them, though Rehum, the 


_ Aramaic section, besides requiring a large number of textual 


a changes, is in itself most improbable. 

















placing of this section is correct, since Ahasuerus (the Xerxes 


his reign could belong to the period between Ezra x and Neh. i 
(cir. 446 8.c.) or to the time following the events of Neh. Vi. 
_ Probably the verse was inserted as a link of connexion between 
iv. 5 and verses 7-23 after the latter verses had by mistake got 
into their present context, Nothing corresponding to this 
erse occurs in the parallel section’ of 1 Esdras, which is an’ 
additional reason for regarding it as an interpolation. 
Ahasuerus: Heb. Akhashwerosh; Old Pers. Khshayarsha; 


rell-known king of Persia called Xerxes, by the Greek historians. 

' wrote they: render ‘there was written,’ which the Hebrew 
qually allows, Weare not told whomade the charge. According 
o. the present connexion of.the verse it must have been the 
amaritan party. 





~ 1) Herzog™, V., p. 516 £. 


of the Greek) reigned 485-465 38.c., so that nothing occurring in | 


ram. Papyri (Sayce and Cowley, consonants only) KSy'rk: the 


6. This verse cannot go along with verses 7-23 if the aba - 











86 | EZRA 4. 7,6. 


they an accusation against the inhab 
isa. 
[€,] And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishh m,)} 
et, Tabeel, and the rest of his companions, u 
xerxes king of Persia; and the writing of the letter 
written in the >Syrian bap itt. and set forth in the Sy 
8 éongue. © Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the 


® ‘Heb. Artahshashta. >IT, ioc ~2 
© Ch. iv. 8-vi, 18 is in Aramaic. ie 





accusation : “Heb. sitnah (occurring here He : 
eoghate with the noun Satan, ‘ one that accuses,” ‘maligns? 


7-10. Letter sent to Artaxerxes, See Remarks, f. Pm ea bile 
7. Bishlam: read ‘ with (their) greeting’ ; ah (inc 7 
Luc.), Syr., Klosterm.: ‘Mithredath, &c., ‘write ome = 


respects.’ No change in the original Hebrew text is necessa 
and but a change of one vowel in the present text. it 
Mithredath: not the Persian official of i. ‘8. The Pers 
mentioned in ver. 7 were all probably residents in _Jerus 
members of the Samaritan party, all of them also,, it would 
subordinate officials of the Persian government. re. 
4 Tabeel: an Aramaic name = ‘God is good’ (See Isa, 2 > 
letter: Heb. xishfwan, of Persian origin : found, only x Et 
Ezra. See on ver. 8 ( (letter). 
For Syrian (‘Syriac’ is now used of the language and o a 
letters) use ‘ Aramaic,’ which is a broader term. The R-Vm. gy 
the right sense of the Hebrew. It was neither the P 
character nor the Persian language. Though it would se 
written in Persian by Persian officials, the letter was the 
lated into Aramaic, the language of Persian diplomz 
p. 13 ff.), and of course then written with Aramaic oFS- 
the so-called Assyrian or square Jetters used in modern Te he 2 
8-ro. The letter composed and written, at 
to the Commander and Recorder of Transpotamia, who resided in 
Samaria. They were asked to transmit it with their di “ 


king. At the close of the verse we must supply actually or in sense 
words similar to (‘ forwarded the letter’) ‘ which was as follows.” 


8-23 is written in Aramaic closely resembling that: of the papyri 
récently found in Egypt. See p. 13 ff. ind) SER 


8. Rehum. .. Shimshai : that the letter indited in Jerasalem 
was sent through these two men and their mgr 


by the fact that the answer of the king was sae me et 
Same persons. It is, however, evident that v Syne 










 . . + 
"he ig ts ee 


5 ACES VACA a hs) See. 





rote a letter against Jerusalem to Artaxerxes the king in . 
this sort ; then’ wvore Rehum the chancellor, and Shim- 
shai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the 





somewhat mixed up, the above two names being mentioned by 
mistaketwice. Render as follows: 8. ‘Rehum... and Shimshai 
‘g. and the rest (being) their associates (viz.) the judges,’ &c. 

_" ‘chancellor: lit. ‘master of counsel,’ i.e. counsellor. We 
_ areno doubt to understand the subordinate or Samaritan lieutenant 
of the Transpotamian Satrap. So Meyer, Menti, Bertholet, &c. 
_ With the rapid extension of the Persian empire under Cyrus the 

“territory was divided into four large satrapies, the country west of 
_ the Euphrates and.south’of the Taurus and Amanus being one. In 
Ezra viii. 36, &c., Neh. ii. 7,9, &c., and in 1 Kings iv. 24 (Heb. v. 4) 

_ ithas the name Eber Hannahar, which = ‘what is beyond the river’ 
(Euphrates), and as it is really a proper name we must call it by 
_ its Hebrew name (against its slightly different Aramaic form 

+speaks’) or call it Transpotamia, a name corresponding to Meso- 

" potamia (= between the rivers), though this new name does not of 
course occur as Mesopotamia does in classical or in any authors. 
Throughout the present volume ‘Transpotamia’ will be used. 

_ Meyer transliterates the Aramaic, calling the satrapy ‘ Abarnahara.’ 

That the name was used regardless of its literal sense is shown by 
_ the fact that it is used by those who lived west of the Euphrates 

_ as well as by those residing east of that river: ‘see the passages 
already referred to. Notwithstanding the meaning of the name the 
_ district embraced also the Aramaean country and some other locali- 

‘ties east of the river. See Meyer, Gesch., iii. 136f. ; cf. p. 49 ff 
ue the scribe: i.e. chief secretary of the Samaritan lieutenant. 
_* a letter: the word used (here in its Aram. form) denotes 
_ always an official communication, as from the king or governor, It 
_ occurs only in its Hebrew form (iggeret) in Nehemiah (five times), 

_ Esther(twice), and Chronicles (twice). Inits Aramaic form it is 
_ found in Ezra (four times) alone. It may be of Babylonian origin 

(@girtu), as Fried. Delitzsch, Sayce, Meissner, &c., hold, but that © 

is uncertain’, See on ver. 7 and on Neh. ii. 7. 
- of. Those who joined Rehum and Shimshai in the appeal to 
” Artaxerxes. We have here a mixture of official and tribal (or 
local?) names which have caused much discussion, and in regard to 
_ which no certain conclusion is possible. Perhaps even the names 
cat peoples are to be understood in an official sense: e. g. the 
' Babylonians =those in charge of astronomical matters and WE 


ons of the calendar arising therefrom, &c. 


aT 


; 














\ 








in, 







) Prof. ‘Sayce says that the etymology bt the word can be ex 
>. plained from the Babylonian alone, which shows, in, his opinion, that 
the Hebrew and Aramaic terms are borrowed from the Babylonian. 





- 


to chites, the Dehaites, the Elamites, and the rest | 


letters corresponding to ‘phars’ are those of Persia. 


88 sti‘«éEZKAA 4.10, : 
Dinaites, ahd the Apharsathchites, he 
Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the § 









9. the Dinaites, &c.: render, ‘The Persian judges, — i 
Persian tarpelites, &c., the Archevites,’ &c. The words Aphar- — 
sathchites, Apharsites in ver. 9, and Apharsachites in v. 6 and vi, — 
have never been satisfactorily explained, though many guesses ~ 
have been made as to places whence the words are supposed to 
_be derived. Hoffmann and Meyer suggest that at the basis of 
each word we have the Hebrew and Aramaic word for Persia— ~ 
‘the consonants are identical—and that the c/ in Apharsathchites 
and Apharsachites is the old Persian (Iranian) adjectival ending. — : 
Meyer then omits ‘and,’ rendering as above. The ‘Persian — 
judges’ and the‘ Persian tarpelites’ (an unexplained official term) 
of the Samaritan subsatrapy are not to be classed with those — : 
whom the Assyrian king Osnappar transported. Of many ex- — 
planations this seems to the present writer the most likely, or at any — 
Fate the least unlikelyone. See Meyer, Enést., 35 ff. v. Hoonacker 
(Nouvelles Etudes, p. 166 ff.) argues strongly that the words here ~ 
‘stand for peoples and not for officials, as Kosters maintained, 

Dinaites: read (slightly altering the vowels) ‘judges.’ 
1 Esdras, Luc., and some MSS. of the LXX. ae 
Aphorsathohiton: render ‘Persian.’ The initial is ‘pros 
thetic and no part of the root (so often in similar words: see — 
Meyer, as above), and the ‘t’ wrongly inserted. The Be : 




















Tarpelites: probably officials, though the etymology of the: 
word is untraceable. Perhaps the text is at fault. ; 

Apharsites; render ‘ Persian’ (see above). 

Archevites: people from Erek (Gen. x. 10), the Assyrian 
Arku= Urku in Babylon. be 

Shushanchites: the ch is the old Persian (Iran.) adjectiv ; 
ending (see on Apharsathchites)!. We are to understand mi 
from Susa. 

the Dehaites, the Elamites: read and render ‘that i is the 
Elamites,’ Susa being the ancient capital of Elam: so LKX 
Luc.) and most moderns. . We should hardly in English speak 

of ‘Londoners and English people.’ 

10. Osnappar: identified first by Gelzer and since by nearly © 
all scholars With Ashurbanipal (king of Assyria from 668 to 626) 
_ the Sardanapallos of the Greeks. Two consonants have dropped — 
“out of the word ; in other respects the consonants of both noe ; 





1 The old Elamite form is ‘ Susunqa.’ 









a of the letter that ticn, sent unto (PRE, the — 
King; Thy servants the men beyond the river, and so 
forth. Be it known unto the king, that the Jews which 


re almost identical, notwithstanding the differences in English. 
owley (Aramaic Papyri). 

_ brought over: this does not apply to the Persian officials 
ientioned in the preceding verse: see notes on, 

_ in the rest, &c.: render ‘in other parts of Transpotamia,’ 
1e words in italics are not needed. The Aramaic (and Hebrew) 







epresented in English by Transpotamia, cf. Mesopotamia. The 
‘proper name thus suggested is, though a hybrid, less objection- 


the river’ is misleading, as it is often used of dwellers who are 
* themselves ‘ beyond the river ’ (Euphrates), though it denotes the 
‘Same stretch of country in their mouths as in the mouths of, say, 
Persians : see on ver. 8. 

Samaria was not the only part of the province or satrapy whither 








so designated, joined in the message to the Persian king. 






"words are uSed (see vii. 12 and the Aramaic papyri) as a formula 
"introducing a letter. The verb ‘wrote’ is to be supplied from 
ver. 9, but in Aramaic (as in Hebrew) does not need to be repeated. 


11-16. Contents of the letter containing the accusation.” 

~ Kuenen (Zinleitung, i. 2, 178) and Stade (Gesch., ii. 159) say that 
_ the letter bears marks of fabrication with a view to extolling the 
: ‘power of'the Jews (see verses 13, 19 f.). But the senders of such 
> a missive would of set purpose magnify the power of the Jewish 
‘community. 













Esther iii. 14, iv. 8, viii. 13. 


tamia’: see on ver. 8. 
_ and so forth: see on ver. Io. ¢ 
(2, Jews: ‘this is the earliest occurrence of this word for the 







‘inhabitants of the Southern Kingdom (2 irines xvi. 6, xxv. 25, 8C.),. 
‘It is in this new sense that the term is now employed. With us 
i s? are those who profess Judaism wherever they live. _ 
es 


_ for ‘beyond the river’ is really a proper name, and might well be — 


_ the Assyrian king brought foreign settlers. These, or the officials” 


‘11. copy: the word used here is of Persian origin ; it occurs 
‘in ver. 23, v. 6, vii. 11,,and (with the difference of one letter) in ~ 


and / are. written very much alike in Aramaic: see, Sayce and © 


ible than any other which occurs to the present writer. ‘ Beyond ~ 


and so forth: render (wrote) ‘as follows.’ The original ‘ 


the men Bayon the river: render ‘the men of Transpo- 


13 


14 


5 






go EZRA 4. 13=15. is 


came up from thee are come to us unto Bs ‘they 
are ‘building the rebellious and the bad city, and “have 
finished the walls, and repaired the foundations. Beit — 
known now unto the king, that, if this city be builded, 
and the walls finished, they will not pay tribute, custom, 
or toll, and in the end it will endamage the kings. Now 
because we eat the salt of the palace, and it is not meet 
for us to see the king’s dishonour, therefore have we 
sent and certified the king ; that search may be made in 
the book of the records of thy fathers: so shalt thou 





have finished, &c.: in the next verse the finishing of the | 
wall is still in the future. _ Better therefore treat the forms of 
verb here and there as future perfects : ‘ They are building . 
will have finished ., . and repaired.’ Tense as such.is not expressed 
in Semitic, but manner of action, either completed or still pro- 
ceeding, and that in past, present, or future. See Heinrich Fes 
a Centenary Appreciation (by the present writer), pp. 48 ff., 81 fl. 

13. tribute: a money contribution paid by a subject province 

to the imperial exchequer ; see vi. 8 and Neh, v. 4. _ ; 

custom : a tax levied on income (merchandise, agricultural 







maintenance of the province itself and the payment of its offic 
toll: a road tax for the upkeep of the roads and for m 
new.ones. Cf. the charge made in, this country until lately 
turnpike gates. 
in the end: so Bertheau-Ryssel (tracing the word to 

Persian), Fried. Delitzsch (deriving from Babylonian), and others. 
The: majority of scholars, changing the final letter to one almost” 
exactly like it (s for ), give it a‘ rendering similar to'that of the 
A-V.; translating ‘this part of the verse thus: ‘and it (the city) 
will affect injuriously the revenue of the kings.’ So the Rabbis. 

14. we ‘eat the salt of the palace: in Aramaic the verb 
rendered eat and the noun for salt are cognate, ‘we eat salt of the 
salt,’ &c. Cf. Heb. ‘ to sacrifice a sacrifice=to offer ‘a sacrifice” 
(see Num.'v. 15). This is a common idiom'in Semitic; *To eat 
of the salt of the palace’ =< to be in the king’s service.” *Kautzsch 
(Aram, Grammar, 71, 72), followed by Bertholet, holds that ~ 
a'symbolic act is heré to be understood, viz. making a covenant 
by salt : see Num: xviii. 19; 2 Chron. xiii. 5 5 ef. Lev. ii. 13. So 
BDB., which ‘interprets: ‘we have assumed obligationies of | 
loyalty.” Heh cad 

15. book: read (with Lwe?, Vulg.,\1 Esde ee ‘books.’ % 


1 
; 
J 
ii 


+ 






‘sat asa Se ee 
o et , 5 
yt Gy OF 


ee city, and hurtful unto kings and provinces, 
and that they: have moved ‘sedition within the same of old 
time: for which causé was this city laid waste. We cer- 


tifythe king that, if this city be builded, and the walls. 


“finished, by this means thou shalt have no portion beyond 
“the river. Zhen'sent the king an answer unto Rehum the 


‘ clay tablets similar to those found some twenty years ago in Tel- 
el-Amarna, Egypt. The Persians had (Kttesias says) adopted the 
custom prevalent i in Palestine of writing ,with ink on skins.. The 
reference is to state records such as were kept by Greeks (see 
Herod, viii. 90), Egyptians (Zeitschrift fir Agyplologie, XxXxviii, 8), 
and other ancient nations, See vi. 1; Esther i. 23, vi, ; 2 Mace. 
ii. 13; cf. Mal. iii. 16, and my note on.Esther ii, 23. 
-.) fathers: i.e. predecessors, Persian, Babylon, and ‘Assyniath 
and that they, &c.: 1 Esd. ii, 23 supplies the subject ‘ the 
_ Jews,’ which has accidentally fallen out of,the. Hebrew.,..-, 
| city laid waste: referring to its destruction. in, 586.- by 
‘Nebuchadnezzar. : Jerusalem would not. have been destroyed but 
for the disloyalty of its subject-king (Zedekiah) and people to its 
Babylonian conqueror, i 
16. The king is,assured that if he allows Jerusalem to. be once 
more fortified it would throw off allegiance to. him as it had to his 
| ally predecessor in 586. 
beyond, the river;: i: e..in Transpotamia : see on.ver. 8 


2 


































17-23. The king’s reply. Kosters and: others see in very 19 

proof that the whole of this’ section is an invention ofthe 
-Chronicler to magnify the importance of the Jewish nation inthe 
past. But it would harmonize with the scheme of the Samaritan 





the’ king afraid of the power they might ‘yet acquire and use. 
“Besides, Conquerors often make the power of conquered foes 
greater than it is, so'as to make their own ‘prowess: appear er 


‘greater. 






ge says) the Artaxerxes who (Neh: ii) permitted 'the walls to be 
ult could not at an earlier date have prohibited the same! and 

mmanded the demolition of what was built. But'he forgets or 
‘does not know that, as Néldeke, Meyer, and other historians have 
pointed out, this king was a'very ‘capricious man, and did many 


eae which it is impossible to a tees ‘with any Serta ie 
OAL 





We must understand, however, in the case of Assyria and Babylon, 


—~ 


arty to éxaggerate the past power of ‘the Jews, so as to!'make — 


ote 


it in he book of the records, and know that this city is 


7 < 


‘Wellhatisen objects to the historicity of this narrative pecanel se 












ie <a cae 4 c 
chancellor, and to Shimshai the scribe, and 
their companions that dwell in Samaria, and ain 

18 ae the country beyond the river, Peace, and so forth. 
. letter which ye sent unto us hath been P plainly read 
19 me. And I decreed, and search hath been made, 
— is found that this city of old time hath made insurrection = 
against kings, and that rebellion and sedition have” 
20 made therein. There have been mighty kings also over- 
Jerusalem, which have ruled over all the country beyond 
the river ; and tribute, custom, and toll, was paid unto 
_ * Or, unto the rest beyond &c. > Or, translated 








17-22. Answer of the king. The king’s answer came to Rene P 
and his companions ; there ‘was therefore but one letter sent at 
this time, not two: see on verses 6-23. 

17. answer: the original term here (fithgama) comes from the 
Persian and denotes usually the decision of a king (see Esther i. 20). 

chancellor: see on v. 8. } 

18. plainly (read): lit. ‘distinctly,’ separating the sounds and’ 
words so as to make the meaning clear. Ignore the R. Vm. * eran = 2 
lated.’ The verb, whence the word occurring here, denotes in 
Heb, and Aram. primarily ‘to separate,’ and then ‘to interpret.” 
But here (Aram.) and in Neh. viii. 8 (Heb.) the passive participle 
is used adverbially ‘ distinctly,’ i, e. sounding the words and oh 3 : 

_ of words so that each can be followed and understood. gt: 

19. this city of old time hath made insurrection, &c. : see 

2 Kings xviii. 7; xxiv. 1, 20. * 
_ 20. Render, ‘And mighty kings have there been over Jeru- 
salem, yea (such as) have exercised rule over all Transpotamia,’ : 
&c.. We need not understand these words as stating what is 
strictly true. The officials in Samaria would have strong reasons - 
for exaggeration. The more powerful Jewish kings had been the 
greater the danger to the Persian power now. Still the WoRte seas 
hardly too strong as applied to David and Solomon, and the archi 

of their reigns might well have been preserved at Jerusalem 
removed by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon. G. Rawlinson thinks the — 
reference is either to Menahem, King of Israel (see 2 Kings xv. 
14-16), or to Josiah (2 Chron. xxxiy. 6f, ; xxxv. 18); but the state — 
of things in their reigns does not correspond to this description. 
On the Arch of Titus at Rome there is an equally exaggerated 
account of the greatness of Jerusalem, which Titus had con 
and destroyed, and,these words are due to the Roman Senate, 

tribute, &c. : see on ver. 13. 










































ase, and that this city be not builded, until a decree 
n: why should damage aid to the hurt Of the 
fread before Rehum, and Shimshai the scribe, and 
rt companions, they went in haste to Jerusalem unto 


ews, and made them to cease by force and power. 


at Jerusalem ; and it ‘ceased unto the second year of 
eign of Darius king of Persia. 








22. why, &c.: render, ‘lest mischief be increased So as to injure 
‘kings.’ So essentially the Versions. © 

Rehum: add ‘the counsellor’ as in verses 8f. and 17 with 

Versions, including Lue. and 1 Esdras ii. 25. 

. The work ts stopped as the king commanded. 

3. by force and power: lit. ‘ with an arm and with strongthe ” 


so ‘an army,’ ‘a crowd of people.’ Syr. ‘with a powerful — 
ee Job xxii. 8, &c.), and ‘strength and army’ = a ‘strong army’ 
adys). 


< IV. 24-VI. 22 (|| r Esd. ii. 25+ VI, VII). 
NUATION OF THE NARRATIVE INTERRUPTED BY Iv. 6-23. THE 


UPPORT OF THE KiNG oF PERSIA. 
4-v. 5. Rebuilding of the Temple resumed and opposed. 


4. This verse is the natural, continuation of ver. 5. The 
truption in the building of the Temple lasted until the second 
- of Darius Hystaspis, i.e. until 520. The occurrence (twice) 
1e verb ‘cease’ in ver. 24 and of the transitive form (Pa.) of the 
verb in ver. 23 may have led the compiler to place iv. 6-23 
mediately before ver. 24, though in reality the latter has reference)’ 
e Temple, the interpolated passage to the walls. 


ig of the Temple. 
he fact that under the influence of the preaching of 





,| Then ceased the work of the house of God which: 24° 


es 1. until a decree, &c.: such a decree was issued to Nehemiah: 


my,’ “which the original may mean, as ‘arm’ pics =  StrEnE ERS ig 


EBUILDING OF THE TEMPLE, WITH THE APPROVAL AND 


Haggai and Zechariah urge the people to complete the’ 


all be made by me. And take heed that ye be not slack y s 


‘with a strong arm,’ a hendiadys, The second word means 


> 4 
ate aaah 


ar 


St 
oa tat 


Nae 


t= 





Th pe: eee a 


5., Now the prophets, Haggai the prophet, ‘and Zechaviah- 





it may be inferred that this task was not made impossible but 
\ simply difficult by the Samaritan party: see on iv. 4. To! ‘what 
are we to ascribe this fresh interest in the Temple?” Proba 
as Meyer points out}, it is to the expectation which had n 
that the Messianic time was dawning. Many of the signs 
spoken of by the older prophets had shown themselves. The 
Persian kingdom at the accession of Darius (521) was torn 
asunder by internal dissensions, its very existence being en- 
dangered by the defection of subject countries, such as. 
Armenia, Babylon, Media, Parthia, and especially Susiana, whi 
almost succeeded in regaining its independence. All this seem 
to portend a still greater shaking of the nations, presaging the 
fall of Persia and the setting up of the Messianic kingdom 
with Zerubbabel as king (see Hag. ii. 23, Zech. vi. 8-13, and 
Driver’s notes in Century Bible). The celestial signs. of the 
downfall of Persia resemble those which were to precede | 
of Babylon (Isa, xiii. 10, 13; cf. Amos v, 18; Ezek. xxxii. vf; 
and Joel ii. 27). Sellin? has tried to prove that a Messianic 
kingdom was actually established in Judaea with _Zerubbabel 
for king, but that this part of the province was reconquered, 
Zerubbabel being put to death. Winckler holds a_ similar 
position. To both the sufferingservantin Isa. liii is Zerubbabel, who 
suffered at the hand of the Persian government for the good « of the. 
people. Much of this is mere speculation capable of neither proof — 
nor disproof. But itis probable that both Haggai and Zechariah 
were prompted in their preaching bya belief that the Messiah w: 
about to make His appearance ; that the Temple was therefore to 
be built for His reception, so that all the nations of the earth might 
gather therein to worship the one true God (see Isa: iii; ped &e.). 
1. (the prophets, Haggai) the prophet: though ; apparently 
unnecessary after what precedes, its correctness is supporte 
by vi. 14, Hag. i. 1. ‘Haggai the prophet’ seems one whole 
clause, not to be broken up. Haggai (see his book) reproves the 
people for their délay in going on with the work of building the 
Temple. His prophecies:were uttered in the second year of Darius 
(520); that Darius Hystaspis (+485) is meant and not Darius 
Nothus (+404) is proved by the fact that some of the present 
builders had seen the Temple destroyed in 586: see Hag. ii. 3. 
Zechariah, the son of Iddo: the word rendered ‘son* bee 
often descendant; here it means grandson: see’ 
‘Zechariah the prophet, son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo? “we 
probably read in Neh, xii, 4-0f this Iddo as head of a priestly 








1 Geschichte, iii. 194 ff.; Entstehung, 174 ff So Driver, ‘ Minor 
Prophets’ (Century Bible), 151 f. Serubbabely 


SE Sepia wn 


0 


ee ee Se 





Ba and | Jerusalem ; in the name of the God of Israel 
rophesied they unto them. Then rose up Zerubbabel 


ith them were the prophets of God, helping them. 
® Or, which was upon them 


» 


y that returned with Zerubbabel and Jeshua: and in 
xii. 16 mention is made of a ‘Zechariah son of Iddo’ as 





uld be a descendant of the prophet. The same names con- 

ntly recur in oriental genealogical lists (Arabic, Hebrew, 
aritan, &c.). 

‘In Zechariah’s genuine prophecies (Zech, Sit) there are eight 


severally disposed of. The prophet shows: that the way 
ally open; that with God’s help. they could and. should 
rward with the work. Zechariah’s prophecies belong:to the 
rs 519-517, being dated in the second and fourth year of Darius. 


‘inspired to speak,’ In any case the idea of prediction is not 
the word itself, though one that speaks by the authority or 


“warning men of the consequence of.sin. 
_ the Jews ...in Judah and Jerusalem: ive, those. in the 


maining in Babylon and other places out of Palestine. if 
in the name, &c. ; render, as in the R.Vm., ‘in the name of 


- 











"Jeshua: see on ii. 2. 
began to build: see on ili. 8-13. The former beelaerl 


teen years, that a new beginning had to be made, 


1 In verses 5, 9 and in vi. 7, 8, 14, the elders alone are 
oned. Bertholet thinks the difference due to different 


not act in the name of the other elders? And did not elegance 
es how shepest variety of expression as a desirable thing ? 






















; prophesied u unto the Jews that _were ine 


son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and Y 


of a priestly house in the time. of Nehemiah. The latter _ 


fisions in which that number of difficulties or discouragements | 4 


‘he word wabi means probably first of all a pans Ros then a S 
= on behalf of God, or one; commissioned by God. Kuenen 
id others give the noun a passive sense, ‘ one that is stirred up’ — 


ration of God will sometimes speak of the future, especially _ 


so slight, and what was done so injured in the intervening ne 


re and in iii. 8 Zerubbabel and Jeshua are the leaders in 


ces, but why? Were they not elders (see ii. 2), and did 


es | EZRA 5.3, rhe 








beyond the river, and Shethar-bozenai, pe th 
panions, and said thus unto them, Who gave ¥ 
4 decree to build this house, and to finish this wall? # 
“* Or, Then spake we unto them after this manner. What, 
they, are the names of the men that make this building? © 


according to some ancient versions, Then spake they unto is a 4 
See ver. ro. 


Vv. 3-vi. 12, see on vi. 7 (1 Esd. vi. 3-34). Unsue opposition. M2 
of the Persian officals and their allies to the building of the Femi 
v. 3-5. Persian officials make inquiries of the builders, ey 


3. Tattenai: called Sisinnes in 1 Esd. vi. 3 and in Jouegiees : 
Antiq. xi. 1.3. In the Cuneiform contract tablets of the first and : 
third years of Darius Hystaspis (Nos. 27 and 82) mention is” . 
made of an Ustannai, governor or satrap of Transpotamia: he 
is described in Assyrian word for word as here in Aramaic 
{lit. governor of the (province) across the river]. That the same 
individual is meant is hardly open to doubt. Bruno Meissner who — 

was the first to point out this identification thinks that here and 
vi. 6, where alone it occurs in the O. T., we should read Ce 
from which Tattenai could easily arise. 

There is surely no difficulty, though Wellhausen and others say” 
there is an insuperable one, in thinking of Tattenai on pape 
satrap of the whole of Transpotamia as ignorant of an edict i 
‘sixteen years before by Cyrus. In comparison with the 
province he administered, Palestine was a mere corner, Ps its: 
people of no great consequence politically. It may of course be 
that, as Meyer and Bertholet conjecture, the satrap feigned igno- ; 
rance only, so that he might throw in his influence with that of the 
Samaritans against the project which the Jews had in hand. It 
is likely that he had been newly appointed, and that he was now 
on a tour of inspection through his satrapy. , 

governor: here, as in ver. 6, vi. 6, and Neh. iii. 7, in the 
sense of satrap (see on viii. 36). Generally the word found here 
(pekhah) denotes a ruler of a sub-satrapy or province (Samaria, 
Judah, &c.). 

Shethar-bozenai: probably chief secretary to Tattenai, as 
Shimshai to Rehum (iv. 8). Read (with Meyer and Andreas- 
Marti) ‘ Mithra-bozenai ’ =(in Persian) ‘ Mithra is Saviour’ : #zand 
sh are much alike, and vowels are not written in ancient Hebrew. 

wall: so Syr. and Vulg.: see also v.9. This rendering is 
supported by the cognate languages (Assyrian, &c.), and also- 
by the sense required for the word in the other known : 
of its occurrence (the Sachau Aramaic Papyri i tine eee « 


















Lis 








‘the shell that iniaké ue s building > But when eye of their 5 


s 


od was upon the elders of the Jews, and they did not make 


ive sent a-letter unto him, wherein was: 7) 
ten thus ; Unto Darius. the king, all Sess Be it 8 
; ® Or, they returned answet 1a 





troyed the sammie’. . the stone pillars . .\. stone gates, doors, 
roof and’ the panelling of the wall.’ Nikel, Haupt, Bertholet, 
&e., translate ‘sanctuary,’ and support this! by another Assyrian 
word (ashru), which however means ‘place,’ ‘ position,’ and by 
the supposed parallelism with ‘house,’ ere icra vl 
‘mean ‘Temple.’ i 
4, (Then spake) we: read (with LXX, ayn) ‘they, isles 
tenai, &c., ‘spake unto’ them’ (Zerubbabel, &ce.) ‘ aftersthis 


as report. 

Tattenai gave no ees that the work stucr be simgouieel 
ding the inquiry to be made. The answer could ‘not ‘reach 
TU lem from Susa before some four or five months ‘had Pa 


is regarded as a sure sign that God's watchfal rae was upon: 
e work and the workers. See Dan. xi, 12. iB 
elders : see on ver, 2. i t asdraid 


. 6-VIJ, 12, THe CorRESPONDENCE WITH Darius ( Esd. wie 


q. The letter sent to Darius by Tattenai, Fo. 4), 
, the Apharsachites:, see | on). iv,9.f, Render ‘the Paiciant 
officials),’ i.e. those in iv. 9 called ‘judges’ (R, V..‘ Dinaites”’) 
d ‘tarpelites’ (an unexplained official name), < 
‘beyond the river: render ‘in Transpotamia,’ and see p. 87. 
‘letter: here the word so translated (pithgama) is of Persian 
In iv. 17 it is rendered ‘ answer,’ in vi. 11 ‘-word.’ . The: 
ver. 6 translated ‘letter’ (iearta), is Aramaic. 
il peace: the Aramaic and the cognate Hebrew, Arabic, 
ords, too narrowly rendered ‘ peace,’ include in ‘their mean- 
the elements of well-being, the idea of completeness being 





















mnner,’ &c, If we follow the M.T. we must (with Meyer) 


roe 



























-Judah,.to the house of the great God, which: i 
with, great stones, and timber is laid in the walls, 
work goeth on with. diligence and; prospereth in their 

9hands, Then asked we those eldérs, and. said 
them thus, Who gave you a decree to build this. a 
10 and to finish this wall? We asked them their names — 
also, to certify thee, that we might write the namesiof the — 
11men that were at, the head: of them; -And thus they! 


Si PRs Ts eal as = Ct” 
inherent in the root. It is: used as a form of greeting’ in’ all the - 
Semitic languages, and also in several of the languages of India, 
See on Ps. cxix. 165 (Century Bible). The addition of fall? 
strengthens the greeting, ae 

8. the. great God: Tattenai, &c., speak in the abet of the 
Jews. . Similarly. Cyrus‘ calls Marduk, the principal, Babylonian ’ 
deity, ‘the.great Lord,’ though not himself a Marduk worshipper, 
Luc.and 1 Esd. vi..g attach, the adjective*‘ great’ to ‘house’ and’ 
-not to God (Lord); the Aramaic original allows, though doen neh 
“require,, this: . 
»great stones ;/ lit. “stones of rolling,’ i. e, stones. too pbb = 
be carried, and having therefore to be rolled, Some of the stones ~ 
in. the, western.wall of the Temple at Jerusalem which are still in 
situ are twenty-six feet long, six feet high, and seven feet 
-Amid-the ruined! temples.of Baalbek there are stones still larger. 
The.-renderings.of the LXX (‘chosen stones’) and of the: Lue 
and 1.Esd, vi. 9 (‘polished costly stones’) are due to a\misunder-|_ 
standing of the M.T,, rather than’ to a different reading, In) 
1, Kings v. 31 the. expression is ‘great stones,’ which perhaps. 
should be read here ; the difference in the Hebrew is very slight. + 
timber is laid, &c.: i.e. wooden beams were: set in the 
walls to support floors and ‘lise Siegfried, however, thinks ba 
meaning to be that the walls were covered with wood pane ng, 
but this would indicate too advanced’a stage of the buildings; 
with diligezce: the original wore is’ Retsien and means _ 

- ‘with-eare and diligence.’ BERR 

9. elders: see on ver. 2, walk see'on ver. eee “rh + bn . 
10.‘names* for the names of the elders see ii. 2. © 9° > © 
that were at the\ head of them: render ‘that’ were their 
leaders’ (or ‘ chiefs’), i. €. in the building. The\ word’ rendeé ‘ed 
‘head’ is plural (though somewhat irregularly oo ons and the” 
preposition (beth essentiae of the grammars) one which ‘often 
introduces the predicate. OCS aay 
In verses 11- ae we have the answer which the Jee: 












Yee 


Tin builded and finished. But #,after that our fathers 12 
d provoked the God of heaven unto wrath, he gave 
oe into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, _ 
the Chaldean, who destroyed this house, andjcarried the ee 
2eople away into Babylon., But in the first year of 13 

2 ad king, of. Babylon, Cyrus the king made,.a decree. to 


led ee ‘many years ago, which.a great king of 


fas me * On, because, thal) more (i 6 OE 

9 have given, ito. Vattenai, 8c, \Wer might ‘have’ expected this 

answer immediately after ver. 4. i 

“2. We are the servants of the God of heaven and aethe ye ST, 

erefore (of the same God'whom the Persians’ professed to ~" 

owledge. Iti is strange, to. find Stade! speaking of these 

Sas unlikely to be uttered by Persians, for they are, quoted 

S spoken by Jews. But see! on ver! 8/and on’ vii. 21. 

these many years ago; i, e nearly 560 years betore the 

eign of Darius. 

_ @ great king: i.e. Solomon. «=. : : Ne 

12. Render ‘ Nevertheless after our fathers provoked} ? Be, pa 

uh after that: the Aramaic ‘words are identical with those at the 
ommencement of iy. 23, translated by one English word ¢ when,’ 

‘Though the expression is temporal not) (as' R. V.; ‘Bertheau-" — 

Ryssel, Ryle) causal, yet it is implied that the destruction of 3 

the Temple by Nebuchadnezzar came as a’punishment for the 
in of their fathers in angering God: it was not that God could’ _ sires 

not preserve it if He would. 

Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, the Chaldean : hie 

e€ans. were strictly a people inhabiting a country’ (Assyrian 

ida) . south-east of Babylonia.on what was then the séa-coast. 

y. were conquered by Nabopolassar, King of Babylon (d\ 605), 

nd thenceforward Babylonian and Chaldean meant much the same. — 

lebuchadnezzar was probably by descent aChaldean. TheChaldean  __ 

nguage, though Semitic, is to be carefully distinguished from the 

Vestern cr Biblical Aramaic, often inaccurately called'‘Chaldee.” 

latter is the language ofi‘the present: chapter; “the former — 
resembles Babylonian, though without the cuneiform seript. 

, Cyrus) king of Babylon: he is so called: in at‘ least 

n undoubted: cuneiform passages: (see ZDMG: 5%, Pi 663). 

erxes is so destribéd!in Neh. xiii. 6, and in vil‘22 baie is. 


























tive ARRON OARS CHES w 
ie "hichte, ii. 122 (note). es 
ie ge a2 Be ee 


yy Lh " 









100 RZRA & 5. Meth | 


14 buila this house of God. And the gold ‘an 
sels also of the house of God, which Nebuchadh 
took out of the temple that was in Jerusalem, 
brought them into the temple of Babylon, those di 
Cyrus the king take out of the temple of Baoylon, an 

/ they were delivered unto one whose name was Sheshbaz- 

15 zar, whom he had made governor ; and he said unto him, 
Take these vessels, go, put them in the temple that is in 
Jerusalem, and let the house of God be builded in its 

16 place. Then came the same Sheshbazzar, and laid the ~ 
foundations of the house of God which is in Jerusalem: 
and since that time even until now hath it been in build- 

17 ing, and yet it is not completed. Now therefore, if it 
seem good to the king, let there be search made in the - 
_king’s treasure house, which is there at Babylon, whether : 
it be so, that a decree was made of Cyrus the king ES 


ra 
Sk on eae 


: 


x 




























14. gold and silver vessels: see on i. 6-11. 
into the temple of Babylon: read (with Luc, 1 Esd, v. 8) 
‘into his own temple,’ i. e. the temple of Marduk. 
Cyrus the king: see oni. 1. no 
_. Sheshbazzar: see on i. 8. Had he been identical with 
Zerubbabel, the latter and his fellow elders (see ver. 9) could hardly 
have failed in the reply to make this point clear. Cyrus's com- 
mission came to Sheshbazzar—so it appears here and in i. or 
not to Zerubbabel. ‘ 
15. in its place: see on iii. 3. 4 
16. Though Sheshbazzar, the Babylonian, laid the first pees 
tion of the Temple the work had to be done over again by 
Zerubbabel, the ‘Jew, and those with him: see iii. to and © 
ili, 8-13 and Vv. 2. 
and since that time, &c.: these words do not imply ea 
there had been an off-and-on building of the Temple from the time 
its first foundation was laid. The building once begun can be 
spoken of as going on until it is completed: see on ver. 2. 
17. the king’s treasure house: that part of the royal palace 
at Babylon in which gold, silver, and state documents were kept, 
In 1850 Henry Layard discovered at Koyunjik> the ancient 
Nineveh, a part of the royal palace which had been used exclusively — 
for storing the precious metals, documents (baked clay tablets), 
&e. (Nineveh and Babylon, p. 345). Se¢~ > + ® and vil. 21, 


ged 





























ld this ae of God at Jerusalem, ae let the rine) 
id his. pleasure to us concerning this matter. 


VI. 1-12 (1 Esd. vis 23-34). 


As a result of the investigation Darius decrees that the Jews 
allowed and aided to complete the building of the Temple. 

The objections to the historicity of this section have been many 
ad various, most of them however, in the light of recent research, 





aving little or no weight. 
x. Kosters, Graetz, and others have seen a contradiction 
between verses 1 and 2. We are told (ver. 1) that the search ~ 
was made in Babylon for Cyrus's edict, but that (ver. 2) it was 
‘actually found at Achmetha (Ecbatana). Arewe, however, sure of a 
“contradiction here? According to Spiegel (Eran, iii. 259), followed 
ae Marquart}, Bertholet ?, and Jampel%, Persians had archives in 
f cities in which they resided—Susa, Babylon, Persepolis, 
: Eeaiecis and Ecbatana—and they were frequently moved from 
one city to another. Ferdinand Justi’ mentions edicts found at 
Ecbatana i in different languages, all spoken by peoples subject to 
‘ersia. We must think therefore of this edict as being first 
sought for in Babylon and at length found at Ecbatana. Had 
erger been at work he would have written in ver. 2 clas : 
bylon.or Susa. 

_Kent’s conjecture that in ver. 1 we should read ‘ from Babylon’ 
see below on ver. 1) implies a very slight change in the Hebrew 
nd removes the difficulty noticed above. Torrey® understands 
yy the Heb. Babel here ‘ Babylonia,’ a term wide enough (he says, 
hough inaccurately) to include Ecbatana. 

2, A difficulty is seen by Kosters and others in the extraordinary 

erosity displayed by Darius, a generosity transcending that 
seribed to Cyrus. 
tis said that Haggai and Zechariah could not have complained 

‘the poverty of the people if they had known of such gifts from 

¢ Persian king. 

In reply note (1) that at a later time Wee Stee promises Ezra 
ven more for the support of Jewish worship : see vii. 12-26. 

(2) It may be taken for granted that the two prophets named 

_ make their complaints either before or soon after the rebuilding 
| | been begun: see Hag. ii. 3; Zech. i. 7, iv. 7-10. We may 
ie stime that the work lasted some four or five years. When Tattenai 


ndamenta, pusong=- Com. 24. * Wiederherstellung, 102. 
* Geschichte des alten Persieymenta, p. ° AFSL. xxiv, 221.0. 


169 ) EZRA 6 4 


















and his,companions appear on the’ scéne th 
bably already resumed. : 
(3) There is abundant evidence in the inscriptions ‘thai 

5 Hystaspis and ‘his’ successors ) interested “théemselvés 


than their own (Ahura-Mazda), see Jampel, Wiederhersie 
93 ff. We know from the ascertained tenéts of Mazdaism ‘ 
from the actyal practice of Mazdaists of the time that such toler 
tion 'in religious matters as the books of Ezta and Nehemiah im 
is exactly’ what beforehand we might’ have expected. In” 
~Gadatas inscription, discovered in'1889, we have a message | 
by this very Darius to Gadatas, Pers an’ governor at. 

' Asia Minor, in which the king rebukes this official for not 
shown proper fespect to the worshippers of Apollo, and eSpeci: 
for having made the priests of this god pay é3 like’ “ot 
people. “He says that this deity has’ spoken to | 
well as to the Greeks, See p. 40. 

An inscription in the Still largely preserved 
at Edfu acknowledges gifts by this Darius towards 
of the temple ®. A 

In thé ‘Aramai¢’ papyri ‘recently edited > chine a, 

it is técorded that the Temple ‘of the €: Bee 4 
Which’ had’ existed inthe Ways of the (te sent if Egypt, 
had béen spared by Cambyses, King of ‘Persia, though 
not'spare’the temples of the native gyptians, probably’ be 
these temples Helped to develop the Spirit of national independe 
We have here an illustration of the special favour’ ‘Shown by the — 

” early Persian kings ‘to YahwiSmi or thé religion’ of aoe n 
doubt in part because their own religion was closely allied 

‘3. ‘Marquart objects * that Palestifie was too insi; 
of the Persian dominidni$ to receive So much’ tonsi nits 
it must be remembered that, though in ‘itself small, ! 
the bridge between Egypt atid Babylon, and’ that-as' Such 
of the utmost importance to Persia as a base fromr hi 
either of these powers. It should, be also borne ‘i 
if Palestine were ‘a’ smaller country than, say, ; i 
More oh béhalf of the réligion of Egypt ‘than for that of Palesti 

' Parallels to the procedure of Darius in reference to er 
asa guidé’for his own conduct are very pléntifiil i “hell 
history. - In the *Tel-el-Amarna tablets there are sevetalt 
references. | Winckler® points out that letters belonging to the — 


















1 See, Meyer, Geschichte, iii. ©§ 26, 3451 57- The inscription 
given iio (in German). by Bertholet, Cone P-, ae o. letin. 
de Correspondance Hellénique, xiii. 529. 

5 Eee EDSIUS, Abhandlungen der Berliner Ae eS 

3° Berlin, 1907, Se€ p.. 10, 
a Biivdaicnte: 48f. /P+ 345, 















the house of the # archives, where the treasures. 
laid up in Babylon. And there was found’ at 2— 
b Achmetha, in the palace that is in the province of Media, 





+; Concerning the house of God at Jerusalem, let the 
: '@ Aram. books. ... ~ b’That is, Zcbatana. 
ign of Amenophis III, King of Egypt (fl. cir. 1500° B.¢.), 
, first heard of in the reign of his successor, who "quotes 
_as supplying precedents or authority for his own actions: 
se further Jampel, Wiederherstellung, 104 f.\ ont 
. VI. 1-5. Tue Investication anp 11s. REsutt. 

Render, ‘Then Darius the king made a decree and the 
ives in the treasure house which (archives) had been brought 
Ecbatana) from Babylon were searched.’ The above transla- 
on involves only a rearrangement of the words with but one 
ght, exception, the change of ‘in’ to ‘from,’ i.e. the Substitu- 
fon, of one letter for another greatly resembling it in the old 
sbrew. and Aramaic script. he changes are supported by a 
‘comparison of iy. 27 (treasure house) and of 1 Esd, vi. 23. In the | 
original the verbs are active, not passive, according to a well- 
known Semitic idiom (‘ indefinite subject’) ; see on x. 17. vo ee 
-2. Achmetha: i, e. the Ecbatana of the Greek writers, the es 
capital of Media and the summer residence of the ancient Persian 
ngs. Its present name is Hamadan. See Judithi. 1 ff; 2 Mace. 
33 Tob. iii. 7, vi..7. : he 
_ roll: i.e. a clay tablet such as may be seen in the British 
useum: so Marquart}, Bertholet, Jahn, &c. No word for this 
ts in Aramaic or Hebrew, so that the nearest equivalent ih — 
“th se languages hasto be used. Libraries of such tablets have been | 
found at Koyunjik (Nineveh) and elsewhere. Ktesias, however, — 
ays (according to Sayce) that Persian official documents were 
ten on parchment rolls which he had seen: see p.. 168. © 
and therein, &c.: render ‘and therein was thus written ; 
Memorandum: In the first year of Cyrus the king,’ &c. The- 
word rendered a record denotes ‘ take notice’ or ‘memorandum,’ 
nd refers to what follows. We have an exact parallel in the — 
achau Aramaic papyri, iii. a 
made a decree, &c. : render‘ madea decree as regards the house 
od at Jerusalem (which was as follows); Let the house be built 
where they offer sacrifices and bring offerings made by fire, its height 
‘cubits, its breadth sixty cubits’ (nothing ;anent the length), 
mucerning: join withthe preceding and punctuate as above : 


“l Fundamenta, p. 48:' 
























and therein was thus written for.a record. ; In:the 3 zs 


tof EZRA. 6.4. 















4 score cubits ; with dire rie OE great stones, and *a 
* According to the Sept., one row of timber. : 


so LXX, Marti, Bertholet, A. V. The Hebrew accents support 
arrangement of words in the R.V.: so Syr. The Hebrew t 
itself admits of either. i oe 
foundations thereof, &c. The M, T. can mean only ‘its fou 
tions are borne’ (carried) or ‘ bear’ (carry), which yields no sui 
meaning. Far better make a trivial change in the vowels, which are — 
no part of the original text, and render as above ; ‘and (where they) — 
bring offerings made by fire,” So Haupt (Guthe, oO) oe 
Fried. Delitzsch, Kent.’ €f. 1 Esd. iv. 24, “where they’sacrifiee — 
with continual fire.’ . Fire offerings included the burnt offei K 
mainly those of animals (Lev. i. 9, &c.), but also meal offerings’ ; 
ii. 8, &c.), the sacred bread and frankincense (Lev. xxiv. 7,9, 
; the height ... breadth thereof threescore cubits: n 
is said about the length. Probably we Should read ‘1 
for ‘breadth’; in the Aramaic M.T. there is not much ‘dif 
ence, Solomon’s temple was sixty cubits long by twenty 
and thirty high (seer Kings vi. 2). But this breadth did not ir 
the chambers; adding the latter the breadth of Solauisiate 
temple would be about sixty cubits (see DB. ‘Temple,’ p. 715%). 
If we retain the word height and understand the figures to 
actual measurement, then we must take the height of sixty cubits - 
to.refer to the porch and not to the house. Ina Chron. iii. 4it is said 
that the porch of Solomon’s temple was 120 cubits high,” ‘which 
would make it more like a tower than a porch. _ Josephus, following 
2 Chron. iii, 4 and the present passage, says that the porch of Solo- 
mon’s temple was twice as high as that of Zerubbabel*, but” this — 
writer is never critical, and, when numbers are concerned, seldom — 
to be trusted. It must be admitted that these figures constitute a 
difficulty. Perhaps we should add the length 60 cubits, and under- : 
’ 





stand the edict to denote the utmost Timtts to which the building 
could be carried—6o cubits every way *, 

We need not be surprised at the interest taken by Cyrus in the 
dimensions of the Temple; the Persian kings controlled the religious 
as well as other affairs of their people. 

4, The text is probably greatly shortened, but the meaning 
seems to be that bounding the outer court (there was but one © 
LP ‘ 







1 Antig. xv. 11. 1. 
2 Sayce thinks that nothing is said about length becatse the Seite 
Temple was proportionately longer than it was broad: = e- £ 































: and let the expenses be given out of the | 
house : and also let the gold, and silver vessels of 


Tictaple which: is, at Jerusalem, and brought unto 


lich is at Jerusalem, every one to its place, and thou 
‘put them in the house of God. Now therefore, 
tenai, governor beyond the river, Shethar-bozenai, 


® Aram. their. 


tin Solomon’s temple) of the Temple there was a wall made of 
layers of stone, having on the top a layer of cedar planks: 
-shaped, to allow the water to escape. See DB. ‘Temple,’ 702%. 


e almost identical. 
4 =. the king’s house: i,e. the royal treasure house. See on 
17. What is meant here, however, is that part of the royal 
enue which came from the taxes of various kinds (see iv. 13, 20} 


and cf. Neh. vii. 70) some of the heads of fathers’ houses 


‘estoring the cultus or: worship (sacrifices, &c,). The payment 
mised by Cyrus must have ceased or Tattenaiand his companions 
have known about it. 

The M.T. seems corrupt, as is suggested by the changes in 


ense is clear. 

_ vessels: sce i. 7. 4 
and thou shalt,.&c.: the sudden change of persons is 
iking ; if the text is retained, Sheshbazzar must be the person 
addressed (see i. 11). We have probably only an epitome of what 
the compiler had before him, and it seems not well made. } 


5-12, Darius commands that the Jews be allowed to go on with 
building, and that financial help be accorded them. 

é transition from ver. 5 to ver. 6 is abrupt. In the oriepaas 
ing that Cyrus had so decreed, and wishing to carry out the 


attenai .. . Shethar-bozenai: see on v. 3. 


row of new timber: read (with LXX, Bertholet, Siegfried, 
) ‘one row of timber’: the Aramaic for ‘ new” ’and ‘one? 


ment some such words as the following must have stood: . 


undertaking, Darius spoke thus to his Transpotamian rulers. ae 


By 


ylon, be restored, and brought again unto the temple - 


6 


deme companions the Apharsachites, which are 


“vii. z 24) paid in Transpotamia (see ver. 8)., According to ii. 68 (see X 


rave to ‘the house of God to restore it,’ i.e. perhaps towards — 


umber and person of the Aramaic verbs, yet the. general 


‘Apharsachites: render ‘ Persian (officials).’ See on iv. 9 and : 
PS) ‘ Absa Je 











‘s+ 


_ Jews and the elders of the Jews build this ho 
a8 God in its place.’ Moreover I make a decree w 


9 gence unto these men, that they be ‘not hindered.” 


isa proper name, See on iv. ro. 























shall do to these elders of the Jews for the build 
this house of God: that of the king’s goods, even of 
tribute beyond the river, expenses be given with all « 


that which they have need of, both young bullocks, a 


beyond the river: render ‘in Transpotamia’; the express 


be ye far from thence: i.e. hold your hands: back’ f 
Jerusalem : donot hinder the work the Jews are doin ats rus 
7. Here Zerubbabel and ‘the elders join in di ‘the 
In fact he is an elder (See on v. 2).. Siegfried, “Be 
omit ‘the ‘ governor of the Jews and’ from this verse. ‘See v 
8, 14, where ‘elders’ alone occurs, ei 0 Ve 
_ 8. The Persian king undeértakes 'to provide: the money, but 
Jews must seé to the work. i 

"goods: the Aramaic word occurs also in vii. ‘26, and t 
‘wealth, possessions.’ Its sense here i is resi by fe 
tribute. See on ver. 4. 

' beyond the river: see on iv, Io. 

with all diligence.’ The same word is reridered ‘inv ¥ 

on) and in ver. 12 ‘ with diligence.’ 
. that they be not hindered: this rendering, fol 
Vulg. and depending on the use of the Same’ verb‘in- Saat 
iv. 23), is that of Keil, Oettli, &c. ~ We should, however, pro’ 
render with Bertheau, &e., ’So that there be no delay” : wha 
commanded js urgent and must be attended at-once, © ah a 
9. The Jews are to be helped not only i in the Snlliee, but a 
in obtaining the materials for sacrifice, 
The materials for three kinds of sacrifice are théntiohiea: “abs 
- (1) Burnt offerings: bullocks (see below), rams, lambs” (see 
ver. 17 and ‘vii. 17. (2) Oblations, or vegetable (meal)\ offering : 
wheat (including oil and'salt), see below. (3) Drink offerings win : 
' The ‘first kind were always accompanied by the other fl 
post-exilic times see Num. xxviiif. and cf. the ancient canter: 
‘tion of sacrifice as a social méal (flesh, vegetables, and wine). 35 
young bullocks: render ‘oxen.’ The word. rendered 
(not found inv. 17) meanis literally “sons of,’ and in - 
‘in such casesds commonly,.as here, not to be, translated. - 
‘sons of men’ (Ps. cvii. 8, see on in Century Bible) 


$i 


’ 


3 
a 
: 


= 
; 
: 





Bie ati 


bite 9 oe eke! Se 


EZRA 6. to, 31. Fy 107 


rams, ind: lambs, for burnt offerings to the God of 
heavén, ‘wheat; salt, wine, and oil; according to the word | 
of the pilests which are’at Jerusalem, let it/be given them 
day by day without fail: that they may offer ‘sacrifices of 1° 
- Sweet savour unto the God of heaven, and-pray for thé 
life of the king, and of his sons. Also I have made a i1 
décrée, that whosoever shall alter this word, leta beam be ©’ 
pulled out from ‘his house, and let him be lifted. up and 


*men’:~ see on‘ii. '41. “The noun translated '‘ bullocks’” is’ that 
whichjin its Hebrew form (s/ér) is translated ‘ox,’ but which) means 
really a head of cattlé,a bull or a cow. 

For the Jaw see Lev, iv. 14, where translate ‘ bull’ or ‘bullock, ? 
Which latter HaS'eome to have the same meaning. 

- “the God of Heavén: so ver: 10, i.2, v. 11 fi, ' vii. £2, 23; and 
the Sachau Aramaic Papyri, i.2; 22 feand iii: gf 

wheat: ‘for making the fine flour mrpacel in the meal offer- 
ing: see Lev, ii. r. 
“salt: used for seasoning the offering j)see Lev. ii. 13. 

‘wine: for the drink offering or libation:: see Ex. xxix. 40; 
Lev. xxiii. 13; Joel i. 9. 

* oil: to mix with the fine flour: see Lev. ii-1 ff. . Siegfried 
thinks the oil was ‘poured forth as a libation,sce Gen. xxviil. 18, 
¥xxv. 14. But wine is here the'drink offering, 
without fail: Aramaic ‘without: ceasing,’ i.e. ¢ without 
intetinission:’ : 

“10. that they may offer: render ‘thatthey may kéepon offering.’ 
""” Sacrifices of Sweet Savour: One word inthe Aramaic, what 
is soothing, pleasing to the smell: see Gen. viii. 21.~ We have 

‘full phrasé in the’ Hebrew of Lev? i. 97 Jit. “an odour of what 
‘tranquillizing to Yahweh’ -\After the exile \incense was _ 
burnt on the incense-altar) and some think this is here referred to, ~ 

and pray for the life of the king, and of his'sons: see Jer. 


3 <xxix. 7. Similarly at a later time the Jews prayed for the Roman 


* 
5 
4 
5 





_ Aramaic Papyri,i. 2f., 26-28. 


- impaled 3,000 Babylonians when he, took th 
eect ei 1 Her. iii. 159. ; 


emperor (Philo, Legat. ad Gaim, § 45). See further i. re-12; 
t Macc. vii. 33, xii. tr; 2. Macc. iii,..35, xiii. 23, cf, the -Sachau 












il. alter: i.e. act contrary to the law, not change if ars 
iii. 28. Perhaps we should with 1 Esdras read ‘ trans ' 
let.a beam, &c.): the punishment meant ist 

a living body being spiked per anum ona poi 
Xxv.4; 2 Sam. xxi. 6, 9, 13, and the note on 








~ 


4 EZRA 6. 15,16. He Gage 





be & H 


i < 


“the | grophiesving of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah 
‘the son of Iddo. And they builded and finished it, 
according to the commandment of the God of Israel, 
and according to the decree of Cyrus, and Darius, and 
Artaxerxes king of Persia. And this house was finished 
on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the 
“sixth year of the reign of Darius the king. And the 
children of Israel, the priests and the Levites, and the 
“rest of the children of the captivity, kept the dedication 


_ 


5 


6 


Co 





through the prophesying of Haggai... and Zechariah: 

according to v. 1 these prophets caused the Jews to set about the 

_ building ofthe Temple. Here we are told that they remained along- 
_ sidethebuildersurging and encouraging them to go on with the work. 

We have no record of the words uttered by these prophets in the 
latter partof the four (ver. 15) years covered by the Temple building, 
neither have we of much which other prophets (Isaiah, &c.) said. 

_ Artaxerxes: the clause containing this name is an obvious 
interpolation. This king reigned from 465 to 423, and could have 
had nothing to do with the rebuilding of the Temple completed in. 
515. The addition is due probably to the marginal note of an 
ignorant transcriber or to the influence of iv. 7f. (see on), regarded 

as part of the account of the building of the Temple. . Josephus 
has in this connexion the name Cambyses!, which is yet more 
unlikely to be correct. Here the Jewish historian departs from 
his great source, 1 Esdras, which throughout this history is very 
confused and confusing.’ 
_ 15. Adar: the twelfth month=our February-March: see on x. 
9,17. According to the present verse the Temple was completed on 
_ the third day of Adarinthe year515. 1Esd.xii.5, however, followed 
by Josephus*, has the twenty-third day, and Bertholet adopts this, 
_ holding that inthe Hebrew the numeral 20 has fallen out. 
16-18. Dedication of the Temple. Bertholet thinks that the 
_ Chronicler here resumes his narrative, Instead of the Jews and 
their elders we have now Israel, priests, &c. We have here, how- 
“pay to do with a religious function, and one might expect function-. 
aries peculiarly religious to appear on the scene. Besides, where ~ 
“else does the Chronicler write in Aramaic? Assuming the existence 
“of Temple records, they would be of different dates and styles. 7 
16. children of Israel: render ‘Israelites,’ and see on li. 41. 
' children of the captivity : render ‘ Exiles’: see on iv. 1. 
the dedication: we must not think here of the Feast of ~ 



















VW Antig. xis 4. 4. 2 Ibid. xi. 4. 7. 


+8 


1 Kings viii. 5, 63. 


__sin offering, but there is not a word about an accompanying) burnt : 


’ thé word does not occur in this sense in the O. T. The Pe 






























etication of this house of God an pehiriey ‘bullo 
hundred rams, four hundred’ lambs; and‘fora s 
ing for all Israel, twelve -he-goats, according ta @ 
number of the tribes of Israel. _ And they set the»pri 


Dedication established about 165 B.c. to commemorate the P ri 
¢ation and re-dédication of the Temple after its pollution ‘by 
Syrians. This latter is kept by Jews in our own time, and is 
known by the Hebrew word (Ahanukkah) employed, heres 5 
Num. vii. 7, and on Neh, xii. 37. 
with joy: in the LXX Psalms cxxxviii, cxlvi-cxlviii are in the 
title connected with the names of Haggai and Zechariah,.probably, 
owing toan ancient, tradition, that these salms were compased na - 
the present. occasion. They are all t them psalms of, thanks- 
giving and. joy. Wee 
17. And they offered, &c. Cmte with tbs. mysh.. : 
number of animals offered at the dedication of Solomon’ ’s temples. 


for a Sin offering, &c.; the practice here, understanding the 
sacrifice to be for the sin of the congregation, . differs from; 
law in Lev. iv. 13 ff., and from that in Num. xv. a2ff. Here 
viii. 35) twelve he- -goats : in the latter passage (ver, 24a 
bullock) is to be offered as aburnt offering and a he- -goat as.a sin. — 
offering. In Lev. iv. 14 one bull (or bullock) is, required for the 


offering. These divergences, can be explained only as eat : 
istics of different periods. See Bertholet on Lev, +y, and Soa : 
Num. xv, 22 ff. % “— BE 
sin offering: a sacrifice first Dod oa in Ezek. “xl. 395 

forming an important part of the P code, It involved the te ¥ 
ledgement of sin and the need of Divine favour. 3 

18. For details of divisions of priests and courses of Leyites 

“rt Chron. xxiii-xxvi, where the word translated in this 
courses is (in its Heb. form) used of the sub-divisions cs 
and priests. “Exceptin the present verse and in 1 and2Cht 


teuch i ‘is, therefore, silent about these courses unless they. 
plied in Num. fii, vii. | Our books of Chronicles belong, 
present form to about goo B.c., but the incidents they ree r rda is 
of course older, and so are the sources used, . We may, ics 

verse and even (so Bertholet) this whole section (ver 16-1 

the Chronicler, but it is not at all unlikely tha Sone 
priestly divisions and the Levitical courses the sin _the 
more elaborate sub-divisions, The word rendered. Aiviciqus 








Pocukent Riicek 
_T And the children of the captivity kept the passover 19 
upon, the fourteenth day of the first month.. For the 20 
ts and the Levites had purified themselves 4 together ;_ 
i all of the them. were pure; and they killed the passover for 


® Heb. as, ove. Lae 





Surs (in its Heb. form) but once in Chroniclés (2 Chron.’ xxv! 
and not then as here of "Priests, but of the Levites. 
2 gifter courses 1 Esd, vii. 7 adds : ‘likewise the porters at each 


or.” 


rding to r Chron. xxiii ff., the divisions and courses are, due 
David : : this represents a ‘late tradition and nothing more., 

_ With ver, 18 the Aramaic section, iv, 8-vi. 18, comes to an 
d, the Hebrew being resumed in ver. 19. 


Vi, 19-22. Feast of Passover - and Unleavened Bread. 
_ The Temple is built and the priesthood organized ;.a. begin- 
g is now made in the observance of the-sacred feasts. This is 


ee great feasts had been, observed in the land before the de- 
I uction of the Temple. 

9. See Exod. xiii, 6; Ley. xxiii, 5 (both P). : 
the children of the captivity: see on iv. £; render § (re- 
turned) exiles.’ 

. Kept the, nanapeets zon! the observances of the feasts ace 
recorded in Ezra-Nehemiah, &c., see p. 10. 

first month: i.e, Nisan: Before the exile the year boise in 
-autumn with the month; subsequently. and still called Tishri, 
isan being the seventh month. Soon after the exile the Assyrian- ; 
bylonian names, and the habit of beginning the year in the 
ring (Nisan) became, general. At a later time, however, the 
Ider custom, still in vogue, of beginning. the year with Tishri in 
autumn came in, - 

20. For, &c.:.the Passover was now observed because the — 
priests and Levites had purified themselves, See 2 Chron. xxxvo 6._ 















asa domestic rite at which ate ead of the house officiated. The 


t this feast should be: kept - the sanctuary; the priests officiat- 
The, ‘P. code (Exod. xii. 1-20) made the feast once more - 


as it is written in the hook of Moses: see on ili. 2, Ac- 






















actly what might have been expected, for no one doubts that the 


- {| According to the ancient law (Exod./xii,. 21-27) thé Passover 


and Jay; and.it is this law-which moders Jews follow, 























22 Israel, did eat, and kept the feast of dilesvened t 2) 
seven days with joy: for the Lorp had made t 
joyful, and had turned the heart of the king of A 

unto them, to strengthen their hands in the’ work of 

house of God;'the God of Israel. pe OS 


_ without, however, the prescribed sacrifice, though a Swe 
of the paschal lamb is still kept up in the Keppurah. ~ In thé 
sent instance the Feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread are ¢ 


Sanctuary, Levites officiating. The P code does not appear 
have become as yet operative, even if it existed: see p. 10. ~ 
children of the captivity: see on iv. t. The exptea 
seems here to denote the lay members of the community. 
21. children of Israel: render ‘ Israelites.’ Ste’ on ii, 
and i iv. I. 
. and all such, &c. : not heathen proselytes as some hold (s 
‘Meyer, Entstehung, &c., p. 129 f.), buthome-staying Jews who 
eh ‘married non-Jewish wives and proved otherwise unfaithful to the 
___-religion of their fathers, but who now returned ‘to the ‘old fai 
_ + abandoning their heathen wives (see x. 11). Somerecent erities 
(Bertholet, Torrey, Kent, &c.) hold that such a putting away of 
; heathen wives took place first not‘in 515 B.C., as the prese 
____ narrative implies, but in the time of Ezra (say 458 B. ¢.): see ix, 
hat x. ar; Neh. x. 29. The Chronicler is thought to have antedate 
Nees thits reforming movement. Surely, however, there must have 
enough remembrance of the teaching of Deuteronomy (see 
> x. 1) to suggest the desirability of such a step. 
| “te seek the LORD: see on iv. 2. } Sate 
ee 22. the feast of unleavened bread: originally qune distinct 
F 
j 





from the: Passover: see Exod. xxxiii, 15. In the’ D pela 
appear to be regarded as one. ‘See Deut. xvi. of. 
Ric the king of Assyria: i.e. Darius I, 50 called ease his 
yey dominions included Assyria. Perhaps the phrase has in ie an ; 
Resi implied compliment to the Persian king thus described. See — 
Neh. xiii. 6 where Artaxerxes I is called ‘King of Babylon.” 

; Kings of Assyria in the strict sense had treated Israel 
_——sverry ‘different way (see Isa. xxxvi-xxxix); what wonders had G 





Zz. a P — . 2. . - 
* ee De ee 2a". , s ~ 







| ae behalf of His people! It is possible that Assyria ap- 


- ~pears. instead of Persia (ver. 15) through a copyist’s error, for as 
an independent power Assyria had long since passed away. We 


F and Artaxerxes is so called in Neh. xiii. 6. 


feb: J) VEX + Neh. viie73>—x. 'g0! o2. grff 
~~ SecoNp Portion or THE Book. Ezra’s ARRTVAL AT) | 
ope JERUSALEM AND WHAT HE DID THERE. ia 


Between chaps. vi and vii there is a period of nearly sixty years, 
_ about which the Bible ‘is ‘silent. Nor have we contemporary; or 
any other reliable records'as to the condition or doings. of the Jews 
ing these years.© It was; however, in these apparently barren 
that the priestly code was elaborated by the priests who; had 


anc t together—also’in Babylon, It is singular that the latest 
edi = s' of Ezra-Nehemiah should jump over this: space ofjtime., 


Pe. 65; indééd, in the original draft of the history this gap, did 
not xist. There must have been at one time state, temple, and 
_ oth r records dealing with the period, which however appear to 
hh been Jost quite early. | Though-little isttold us:in:t<.present 
St ft of the state of things when Ezra arrived, mtua shay DE 
ga _ ed from what is ‘said in Nehemiah of the condition csthe 
“tot ‘y thirteen years later, when Nehemiah came to Jer am. 
Nev. 1=15 shows that Jerusalem was in a bad way. chin ee 
act unjustly and cruelly towards theirdebtors ; the governorsim- 
me tely before Nehemiah were extortionate and unsympathetic. 
R iously matters were even worse. It seems €vident that this 


"de _ption applies more or less for decades, before. Nehemiah 
revéived permission to act the reformer amongnhis own) people. 
Tt was no doubt a knowledge of the state of matters:at and abotit 
_ Jerusalem 'that induced Ezra also to seek and! obtain permission 
“to go to Jerusalem to teach the law of God and to re-establish 
féligious’institutions. - ~ ) 
_ We read no more of Zerubbabel, and we have no. certain inite 
‘mation as to what became of him, Tradition has it thathe returned 
to the Persian court, where he remained.) It‘has not beemproved, 
~ though it has ‘een affirmed, that he accepted the réle of Davidic 
‘king, and even that of Messiah: Seevonv. 2: 


‘Wx Esd. viii, 1-64 (66). : 


_ vii. 1-10 |} 2 Esdi viii. 1-7. Introductory arnahac pasion in brief 
@ summary of what follows th verses 11-28. . Perhaps originally 

verses 11-28 were written on a special| parchment; to which 
verses 110 'weré'attached«as a docket or title.) '., : 

= 5S & ; I 


x 


Se Sma as 


r 


_ know, however, that Cyrus gloried in the ‘title ‘ King of Bebylamt : 


not left Babylon; and that part at least of Isa. xl. ff. was composed - 


vii f. Esva’s arrival at’ Jerusalem; incidents of the journey a 








rig the son of Hilkiah, the son of Shallum, the son ‘ak 
~ 3 the son of Ahitub, the son of Aniariah, the son of Azari 
_ 4 the son of Meraioth, the son of Zersbiah, the son | 
5 Uzzi, the son of Bukki, the son of Abishua, the s son of 


* Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the chi 













_ 1, Now after these things: a piienal in common use i in 
g _ (Gen. xv. 1, &c!), and meaning simply that what is going to, 
/Sirelated took place subsequently to’ what has been related, , 
__ Semitic, as in the classical languages, paragraphs and ‘sentences! 
are linked by connecting particles and phrases, which in ee 
— would have no external mark of connexion. 
¥ " Artaxerxes, i, e. Artaxerxes I, Longitanhe(s6a-eag)! 
; opinions have been held and defended ; see the larger te] cnt 
aries. ‘It is at all events clear: that the Artaxerxes of N 
(see Neh. ii. r) is the above king, since Nehemiah was gove no 
of Judat in the time of the high-priest Eliashib, grandsc 
Joshua, u.igh-priest in 520 (Neh. iii. I, xii. 16): Artaxer: 





_. _Mnemon (404-359), lived at too late a time to make this po 

_ That .e compiler and final editor of Ezra-Nehemiah too 
(ike Ar.axerxes.to be Longimanus seems almost certain, for he 

otherwise have differentiated in some way the king mentio) 


ea this verse.’ Seeon Neh. ii. 1. 

From 1° to the end of ver. 5 we have the genealogy of a. 
_ But the list is obviously a greatly curtailed one, for only, ‘en 
individuals are mentioned in the line of descent from Aaron 

Ezra, i. e. for: the space of some 900 or 1,000. years. P 
‘ben (=* son’) is to be understood in the semse of “dese¢ 
_ Ezra cannot in the ordinary sense be the som of Seraiah, si 

the latter died about 586 B.c. according to 2 Kings xxv. 
_ though of course another person of thé same name might 
__ ‘lived a'century or'so later.. See on vy. 1, viii, 2,.and Neh. xii, 2. 
ee ‘The name Ezra (= ‘help’) as it stands, an Aramaic form, isprobabl 
~ acontraction of Esaryahu ‘(one whom) Yahweh helps,’ Cf, Nebr 

__. miah = ‘ (one whom) Yahweh comforts,’ and Isaiah (Heb. Yesho- 
__-yahu) = ‘(one whom) Yahweh delivers,’ The name is borne y 
.. Others, see Neh, xii. 1, 13, 33. 

5, Aaron the chief priest: the purpose of the padre we 
43 ee ‘to show Ezra’s descent from Aaron. In the older Sources (J, E. 
Aaron is Moses’ spokesman (Exod. iv. 14, Xxiv. 1) and a | 
(Deut. x. 6, J, E, not D). sow 
oe _. The words rendered ¢hief pemet mean, Siterally ent 


xd 







tg. Se seas —e 
“ a 
~ 


EZRA es ke Te eal ae 


riest « ‘this Ene. went up from Babylon; and he was 6 
a ready” ‘scribe in the law of Moses, which the Lorp, the . 
peed of Israel, had given: and the king granted him all 

“his request, according to the hand of the Lorp his, God 





“upon him. And there went up some of the children of 7 


“Israel, and of the, priests, and the, Levites, and the 
“singers, and the porters, and, the Nethinim, unto Jeru- 
seatm, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes the king. And 8 








priest,’ and occur in 2 Sam. xv. 27 (Wellhausen rejects them here), 
“2 Kings xxv. 18 (=Jer. lii. 24), and some half-dozen times in 
. 2 Chronicles. In the P code the expression is ‘the great priest,’ 
_E.VV ‘the high priest’ S Seed eV. Xx. 20's Num. XXXV,. 25, 28, &e. 
In earlier times he is called simply ‘the priest ’ 2 See 2 Kings xi. 
gf. _.Though it is in post-exilic timés that the high-priest became 
an. important functionary, there is abundance of evidence that such 
‘an official existed before the exile: sée DB. iv. 73, 79 ff. (Bau- 
isin, Yet it is singular that in Ezekiel’s programme of religious 
“institutions and offices (Ezek. xl-xlvi) the high-priesthood finds no 
place, probably because it had not yet become a vital part of the 
ecclesiastical system. 


>, 6-10. The return of Esra and his companions, 
_ 6, went up, i.e, to Jerusalem, See ver. 7, il. 1, and viii. Le 
i ‘ready: lit. ‘quick.’ 

H Scribe: originally a secular official, state secretary ; , see 
: Sam, viii. 17, Xx. 35; 1 Kings iv. 3; 2 Kings xviii. 18, xxii, 
a3. &e. In the beginning of the. Deuteronomic period, when 
“through the finding of the book of the law in the, Temple the 
“written word acquired a fresh importance, the term came to be 
“used for one who studied and taught as well as copied the law.’ 
Though the sense ‘ writer’ is the oldest, that of ‘interpreter’ be- 
came more and more its principal meaning. In post-exilic times 
the scribes grew to be a very important section of the people, such 

as | they were in our Lord’s day. 

“the law of Moses: see oniiij. 2. The reference is, however, 
Biers especially to the law which Ezra had brought with him 
_ from Babylon (ver. 14) : see p. 8 ff, 

i according to the hand, &c,: the phrase = ‘according to 
ahweh’s helpfulness towards him,’ and is characteristic of the 
| Ez: a memoirs from which the present narrative is extracted. See 
"verses: 9, 28; viii. 18, 22, 31; and also Neh, ii, 8, 18. Cf. ‘the 
t eye. of their God,’ v. 5, andsée 2 Chron, xxx. 12. 
ores Far the elasses here mentioned see ii. 36 ff. 
4 _ inthe seventh year of Artaxerxes: i.e. in 458, 


12 












g the seventh year of the king. For upon the et 









116 e EZRA 7. 9,1 z 


he’came to Jerusalem in the fifth ‘month, | 


and on the first day of the fifth month came he to 
Jerusalem, according to the good hand of his God upon 


1o him. For Ezra had set his heart'to seek the law of 





8\ Heb. that was the foundation of the going up. id : 
8. the fifth month: i.e. AbAbib), corresponding to’ our i at iz 
or August. a 


Since Nehemiah arrived in the twentieth year of this J 
(Neh. ii. 1), there was a space of thirteen years between the ean 
arrivals (458-445). 

Wellhausen thinks that Ezra arrivedin the twenty-seventh ye 
(i. e, 427), the number twenty having fallen out, Van eet “a 
who agrees with Kosters in making Ezra’s visit subsequent to eee 


“miah’s, says Artaxerxes II, Mnemon (404-359), is ‘the king m 


ver. 7 See on ver. 7. Winckler, i in different parts of ge same 
volume (Altor. Forschungen, ii. 222, 242), argues inconsistently for ; 
two different dates, viz. in the reigns of Cambyses and Darius. 

9. began: it is better to vocalize the Heb. as in Esther i, a. 
(‘so the king had appointed,’ &c.), and to, translate ‘ decided’ or — 
‘arranged.’ Though the journey was decided upon on the first 
day of the first month it was not actually begun before cetera = 


‘later : see viii. 32. The time taken for the journey would 
- about 108 days, reckoning from the twelfth day of Nisan (viii, 






to the first day of Ab. The distance from Babylon to Jerus 
in a straight line is about 300 miles. But travelling in the 
especially in those times, was difficult as well as dangerous ; and the | 
Jews now had-much valuable baggage to carry and to care about, 
Besides, to avoid the desert, Ezra’s caravan had to make a detour 
by Carchemish. Ryle calcnlates that the actual distance covere 
was fully 900 miles. The arrival would take place about Augt 
(Ab) in the year 458. See Ryle (fm loco) and Meyer, Entstehung, 
10. Why did Ezra set about that long journey? We Gate 

answer in this verse: 

to seek: see on iv, 2. Two Hebrew words are translated 
‘seek’ in the English Bible. The one (darash) =‘to seek know- 
ledge,’ ‘to search,’ and is cognate with midrash (an investigation — 
of the sense of Scripture’ . The other (diggesh) = ‘to seek for 
is lost.’ It is the first that is used here and in iv. 2, and Vi. ot 
Both verbs occur in Ps. ev. 4 (see on in Century Bible). 

Here the meaning seems to be to recognize Yahweh's law and 
that of no other god. The next clause (to act according othe 
law then recognized) supports this interpretation, ~ “J 


“4.9 


at 4 Viet 


oar. ao Y 





; Bebe of the words of the rpenmaidaicnis of the Lorp, 
Eegnd of his statutes to Israel, # Artaxerxes, king of kings, 1 
unto Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of 

- heaven, perfect and so forth. I make a decree, that all 1 


wil ® Ch. vii. 12-26 is in Aramaic. 











- to teach: this was the special function of the sopher or soriber: 
See on ver. 5. 


# 11-26 (|| 1 Esd, viii. 8- -24). The decree of Artaxerxes author- 
: Be Ezra to return and reorganize Judaism. 

Al. Introductory (Hebrew). 

7 Now : the connecting particle (see on ver. 1), not the time- 
‘ adi erb ‘now.’ 
copy: see on iv. II. 
_ letter : see on iv. 7. : 
iB Ezra the priest: see genealogy, verses r-s. He is so éaflels 
e xX. 10, 16, Neh. viii. 2, and also in the title to Ezra and 1 Esdras 


in the Luc. In later times and perhaps here ‘ the priest’ = ‘the 
f 













: ‘Aigh-priest’ : so Neh. xiii. 4, 1 Chron. xvi. 39, and often in P. 

__ the scribe: see on ver. 6. He is so called in Neh. viii. 4,'1g, 
xii. 36. The two titles ‘the priest’ and ‘ the scribe’ are found 
f together not only here but also in verses 12, 21, Neh. Vill. 9 
xi. 26. 


BF "12-26. Contents of the King’s Letter (Aramaic). 
ay 12. king of kings: Darius is so described in the Gadatas 
_ inscription. See p. 102. 

Sets. _ God of heaven : see oni. 2. 

perfect: the Aramaic word has the force of our ‘ &e) 
‘Drientals (Arabs, &c.) are in the habit, when addressing persons 
of distinction, of heaping up epithets to an extent that is hardly 
‘credible to Western minds. Even our German. neighbours will 
_ write on an So vembe ‘To the high born, learned, and very 
honoured A.B.C.’ After scribe the word rendered perfect (lit. 
vhat is to be completed) means: ‘and the other titles of respect.” 
in Rabbinical Heb. a form of this word with the conjunction = 
and’ prefixed is used (often abbreviated) as our ‘ &c.’ 

and so forth: render (wrote) ‘as follows’ : see oniv. ro. 
13. I make a decree: see iv. 19, vi. 8, II. 
‘ts all road &c. : see i. 3. 

















t 


3 


118 EZRA 7, 14216: 





they of the people of Israel, and’ their pries 
Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their ov 

14 will to go to Jerusalem, go with thee.” Foréstaadiiiaee 

thou art sent * of the king and his seven counsellors, to 
inquire concerning Judah and Jerusalem, according to 

15 the law of thy God which is in thine hand ; and to carry 
the silver and gold, which the king and his counsellors — 
have freely offered unto the God of Israel, whose habita- 
16 tion is in Jerusalem; and all the silver and gold that thou — 


* Aram. from before the king. ; 
° \. je ~< 
with thee: Ezra had to be director of the work. ie 


14-16. Ezra was commissioned (1) to make inquiries about the. 
state of Judah and Jerusalem (ver. 14); (2) to carry with him the 
gifts of the king and his counsellors and other contributions. ra 

14. seven counsellors: according to Herodotus (iii. 84) the 

eads of the seven principal families in Persia formed a kind of 

a council to advise the king in affairs of moment. rea 

( of these had the privilege of access to the king. See Estheri. 14. 

» Seven among the Persians, as among the Hebrews, was a eared | 
number ;: cf. the heavenly court consisting of Ahuramazda snd ie 
six,Amesha spentas, or, according to another conception, t 
seven Amesha spentas, the Supreme Good Spirit named being one. 
The Divine court formed perhaps the pattern for the homens 6 

Judah and Jerusalem: see on Vv. I. 
law ...hand: the reference must be to some code freslify | 
brought by Ezra from Babylon and previously unknown to Jews | 
residing already in Judah. That this code concerned itself almost, 
if not exclusively, with the religious side of the nation’s life goes” 
“without saying, but as to what exactly it contained has been 
matter of much discussion, and must remain so with our’ present 
data. That it did not coincide with our Pentateuch or with the 
Priestly Code is, however, among the things which canngt. Be: 
doubted. See p. 8 ff. 
15f.. The contributions towards the Temple and its services | 
which Ezra was to take with him were to be of three kinds: (1) 
The gold and silver given by the king and his (seven) conser: ; 
(2) the gifts of non-Jewish, and (3) of Jewish residen n Baby - 
lon. Cf. the decree of Cyrus to restore the gold and si a vessels 
removed from Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar ;: See on i. 6-11 and 
ef. v. 14 and vi. 5. Ezra showed no scruple in acseptieg the 
financial help of Gentiles. 





. 





Ag 























: aa their drink Siena: Aus: shale offer them upon’ the 


rethren to do with the rest of the silver and the gold, that 
€ given thee for the service of the house of thy God, 


ever more shall be needful for the house of thy God, 
which thou shalt have occasion to bestow, bestow it out 





‘16. offering willingly, &c.: that the king in writing to Jews 
about religious affairs should adopt this religious phraseology is” 
exactly what might have been expected from a Persian monarch 
of the time : see on vi, 12, 


-17f. The money thus obtained was to_be used in providing, the 
Material for sacrifice (ver. 17; cf. Joel i, 8-12) and in meeting 
F _ other needs (ver, 18). 

17. On the species of sacrifices here enumerated see on vi. 9 
4 and also on vi, 17. 
18. the will of your God: as revealed in the law which 

Ea was to bring with him: see p. 8 ff. 

_ 19. the vessels, &c. : not those granted by Cyrus (i. 7), but 
ose enumerated in viii. 25-27. : 

deliver: Schultz, Siegfried, Bertholet, and others render 





: supports this. The extent of the gift is stated in ver. 22. 
the God of Jerusalem: a strange and unparalleled expres- 
sion. Probably we should read with Guthe (SBOT.) ‘the God of 
israel who is at Jerusalem,’ or with Luc., ‘thy God who is at 
Jerusalem.’ 

20. the king’s treasure house: i.e. the treasury of the 
“satrap of Transpotamia, where the taxes collected in the satrapy 


were kept until they were transmitted to the principal royal fiscus 
_atShsa. 


. Aes the house of their God which is in Jerusalem ; — 
aan thou shalt with all spb buy with this 7 


’ altar of the house of your God which is in Jerusalem, — 
And whatsoever shall seem good to thee and to thy 18 _ 


of the king’s treasure house. And I, even I Artaxerxes 2! 


_ € deliver completely,’ ‘hand over wholly.’ The usage in Syriac — 





"deliver thou before the God of Jerusalem. And whatso- 20 


+ 


4 


© yeafter the will of your God. And the vessels that 19 


"44 you, it be done with all diligence, untoan hundred t 


23 oil, and salt without prescribing how much. Wha 
is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be done 


{ 


_ System see on vi. 9. 












— 

i 
Fata >, 

Se 


120 ee “BZRA hawt 


of silver, and’ to an hundred ® measures of witeat Lo 
an hundred baths of wine, and to an hundred baths 


actly for the house ofthe God of heaven ;' for” 
ies thefe be wrath against the mas the —_ and 


® Aram. cors. ’ j oe 



















21, treasurers: the treasurers of the reste of Trans} 
tamia’: See on iv: 8)° These would severally have charge of the. 
taxes until they were transferred to the principal treasury of 
province, whence in due time they were taken to Susa, 
“ expenses, and in this case the gifts to the Jews, being in all cases: 
, ducted and accounted for. 

_. God of heaven: see oni. 2. : 
with all diligence : see on v. 8 and vi. 8. ee 
22. The utmost limit of the help which Ezra may receive from 
the public purse. al” ‘ 
hundred talents of silver: slightly over £35,000, acd 
ing to Meyer. A Persian talent weighed, according to Bendinger'} 
(Arch.™, 201), about 34,000 kilogrammes (see On viii. 26). at 
(Entstehung, 69n.) says that sums almost fabulously ine 
preserved in the Persian exchequer. 
an hundred measures (Aram. ‘corin’) of wueatcia 
I,000 bushels. “ 
- an hundred baths of wine: about 800 gallons. 
salt being very plentiful, and therefore cheap; co 
obtained in any quantity. On the place of salt in = a 


23. Note the terms of respect with which ‘Asheenla weed speaks of 
the Jewish God, and see on i. 2. ™ (cthig. 
_ exactly: the original word is Persian and should probably 
(with Marquart, Andreas, &c.) be translated ‘promptly.”) 
for why, &c. : ‘render, ‘that there be no anger (on the part of 
Yahweh) to the detriment of the kingdom of the king and his sons,” 
for why, &c.: the’words may and here shouldbe ren 
as above, ‘lest,’ &t.' io Qe 
wrath: just ‘as Artaxerxes feared to: incur: aed anger of | 
Bepreh, the national God of israel, so the Israelites | e 


Fs a 


Becgants of this house of God, ‘ shall ad be lawful to 
‘ impose. tribute, custom, or toll, upon them. And thou, 
_ Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God that is in thine hand, 
‘appoint magistrates and judges, which may judge all the 
people that are beyond the riyer, all such as know the 
_ laws of thy God; and teach ye him that knoweth them 
"not. _And whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and 


f the law of the king, let judgement be executed upon him 
~had a great fear of offending Chemosh, the national deity of Meab. 









Yahweh was his own supreme deity (Ahuramazda) as he revealed 
_ himself to the Jews. 

_ 24. Temple officals are not to be taxed. 

priests ... Nethinim ; see on ii. 36 ff 

_ or servants, &c.\: render, ‘even (all) the servants of,’ &c. 
The words are a summing up of the classes mentioned. The same 
Aram. (and Heb). word (waw) stands for ‘and,’ ‘or,’ ‘even,” &ec, 
_ -tribute, &c.: see on iv. 13. According to the Gadatas 
‘inscription (see on vi. I-12) the priests of Apollo were to be 





SS pea 















thy 


a Yet some think that in the present case it is unlikely. 
E hy ? 

25. after the wisdom, &e.: i.e. ‘according to thy God’s 
law,’ &c, Seeon ver. 14. What, if any, is the difference between 
the magistrates and judges whom Ezra was to appoint over the 
"Jews of Transpotamia? Meyer says that two synonyms are used 
i 

for the sake of emphasis, and Bertholet fails to see any difference 

of meaning between the two words. Perhaps the word translated 

Iudges (shaphetin) has in it here something of its original mean- 

ing‘ rulers.’ Probably, however, it is a marginal gloss. 

_ judge: the verb here is cognate with the word rendered 
_ “magistrates,’ a reason for regarding the two classes noticed above 
_ as having identical functions. It is evident from the words which 
ollow that these officials were to have jurisdiction over the Jews 
alone of Transpotamia. 

, 26. the law of thy God, and... of the king: so far as the 













i 


4 Jews of the province were concerned the king, by adopting the 
_ Jewish code, made it his own, so that disobedience towards 


E 


zra's. new law exposed the individual guilty of it to the penalties 
.ed to infringement of Persian law. 








25 


26 ~ 


See 2 Kings iii. 27. Perhaps to the Persian king, as a Mazdaist, ~ 


_ exempted from paying taxes, just as here the priests, &c., are. 


122) EZRA 7. em Pea 








ment, or to confiscation of goods, or to pia sep 

27° [E] Blessed be the Lorp, the God of our fathers, . 

hath put such a thing as this in the king’s heart, to bez 

28 the house of the Lorp which is in Jerusalem ; and hath — 
extended mercy unto me before the king, and his coun: 

sellors, and before all the king’s mighty princes. A T 

- was strengthened according to the hand of the LorD my 
~ God-upon me, and I gathered together out of Israel chief 

omen to go up with me. eae 

® Aram. rooting out. Bid 





banishment: Aram. ‘uprooting,’ The cognate yerb in : 
Ps, lii. 5 is rendered ‘and root thee (out of the land of the livin; 
The sense here is probably ‘excommunication, not ‘Db: J 
-ment’: see x. 8. 3 


27f, Esra’s Doxology (Hebrew). This is perhaps a Psalm com- ; 
posed by Ezra to be sung after the receipt of the king’s decree. 
It comes in rather abruptly after ver. 26. Originally there were, — 
it seems likely, some words of introduction to verses 27f., such as . 
‘ And Ezra spake these words after he had receivedthe royal: decree.” j 
27. God of our fathers: the God who helped our fathers has” 
shown Himself our Helper : -see viii, 28, x. 11 ; 1 Chron. xxix. 18; 
2 Chron. xx.6. Cf, Acts iii. 13, and Doddridge” s hymn, ‘ O God.of 
Bethel,’ ‘ God of our fathers be the God of their succeeding race.” 7 
hath put ...in the king’s heart: see Neh. ii, 12, vii. Si 7 
r Kings x. 24. 
to beautify: the sense is to restore the Temple to the a 
which it had before its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar. — 
Sellin, Siegfried. 

+ 28. mercy: render, ‘loving kindness’; the Aram. word has in ; 
it no implication of guilt. See ‘ Psalms,’ vol. i, P- 360, Century Bible, . 
For the phrase ‘ extend loving kindness’ see ix. 9; Gen. xxxix, 21. 

unto me: the use of the first person in the Ezra memoits 
begins here. : 


his counsellors: see on ver. I4. \ : 
VIII. 1-14 (=1 Esd. viii. 28-40). (ee . 
LisT OF THOSE WHO RETURNED WITH EzRA. ek 






For general remarks on the lists of Ezra~Nehemiah’ see Introd, 
to II and notes on the various sections and verses of that 
eeapicr. In the present list the clerical element takes pre 


¢ iw 
ae 
ere 































ow these are the heads of their fathers? Hote and 8 

3 is the genealogy of them that went up with me from 
ibylon, in the reign of Artaxerxes the king. Of the2 
sof Phinehas, Gershom: of the’ sons of Ithamar, 
: of the sons of David, Hattush. Of the sons of 3 


ar, 
—_* 








the lay, thé priests being named first (ver. 2), the lay clans 
ards (verses 3- 14). It is so in x. 18 ff. and in Neh. x. 3 ff. _ 
in Ezra ii and Neh. vii the lay clans are mentioned first. The © 
ence may be due to the ‘pre-eminence of the lay leaders in 
first century after the return.; The power of the priests grew 
apidly after the introduction of Ezra’s law, itself the work of the — 


estly school in Babylon. SP 
he The list in,verses 1-14 has been shortened, and mistakes nage ~F 
e dently crept in; perbaps all this is to be ascribed to the i IgNO=si 4 Ge 


ce of carelessness of copyists or to the imperfect state of the — 

hment and writing before them. ia Pe 

The following plan may be yet traced, and it is likely that in . 

he original draft it was uniformly followed : (1) The name of the — 

F clan; (2) that of its chief; (3) the ‘number belonging to the clan as 
that returned with Ezra. Where the M.T. falls short, judged by 

is scheme, the defect can be generally made good fromthe LKX 

r Esdras or both. ; 

The sum total, according to the M.T., is 1,496; according to Ge 

“Esdras it is 1,690. The discrepancy arises from the following _ 
differences in details: the Adin clan, Ezra (ver. 6) 50, 1 Esd. 

( er. 32) 250; Shephatiah, Ezra (ver. 7) 80, 1 Esd. (ver. 34) 

3 Joab, Ezra (ver. 9) 218, r Esd. (ver. 35) 212; Adonikam, 

ra (ver. 13) 60, 1 Esd. (ver. 39) 70. Correcting the M.T. by 

Esdras as above, we obtain the number 1,692, as against the : 

n total of 1,690 in 1 Esdras, 

.. Now: see on vii. 11. 

‘heads of their fathers’ houses: see on i. 5. 

ea genealogy: see on ii. 62. 

. The priestly clans are mentioned first, then the royal David _ 

ay On the meaning of house or clan see p. 52f. ; 

’Phinehas: son of Eleazar and grandson of Aaron. oaks 

Ithamar: youngest son of Aaron: Exod. vi. 23; 1 Chron. v. 29. s 

Gershom and Daniel are heads of the Phinehas and Tthammar’ te 

and not the only priests in the company (see ver. 24). © 

himself belonged to the Phinehas clan (see vii. 1-5). 

miel: called Gamaliel (or Gamael?) in 1 Esd. 29. Daniel ~ 

1ame in Neh, viii, 29. Perhaps the ‘din had two names. 

ee attush, &c. _Join with the next verse and render ‘ Hattush 

on of “So 1 Esd. viii. 29 ; cf. z Chron. iii. 22, 





174 EZRA 8 es 

























a were apa by genealogy of the malar an. ' 
4 and fifty. Of the sons of Pahath-moab, Eliehoe 

son of ;Zerahiah; and with him two hundred — 1a 
5 Of the sons of Shecaniah, the son of Jahaziel; and with 
6 him three hundred males. And of the sons of sa 

Ebed the son of Jonathan; and with him fifty : 
y And of the sons of Elam, Jeshaiah the son of Athaligh }. 
8 and with him seventy males. And of the sons of Shepha- 

tiah, Zebadiah the son of Michael ; and with him four 
9 score males. Of the sons of Joab, Obadiah the ‘son 
of Jehiel; and with him two hundred and eighteen 
males. And of the sons of Shelomith, the son of Josi- 
phiah ; and with him an hundred and threescore males. 
And of the sons of Bebai, Zechariah the son of Bebai; 


Se eae ao aa se Eee 
where this Hattush is grandson of Shecaniah. ‘Son’ often means 
“grandson and descendant : see on vii. 1-5, 


3-14. The lay clans. All these are represented in the list of 
those who returned with Zerubbabel in 537 (see ii. 2 ff.) : 
Ne 


° 


the exception of Shecaniah (ver. 5) and Shelomith (ver. 1 
whose presence in this list as clans is due to textual corrup 
see on verses 5 and Io. 

The number of the lay clans is twelve, corresponding to | 
twelve tribes from which the nation was supposed to have spru 
see on ii. 2. 

3. This verse must begin with Of the sons of Parosh: a 
ver. 2. 

_ males: in ch, ii and Neh. vii females are included int ; 
reckoning. : 
5. Read and render, ‘Of the sons of Zattu, Shecaniah the son of. 
Jahaziel’: so LXX (not Luc.), 1 Esd. viii, 32. Zattu is hanes) 
in ii, 8 and Neh, vii. 13, but Shecaniah occurs in no list as a clan. 
6. fifty: 1 Esd. viii. 32 gives 250. . 
. §&. fourscore: in 1 Esd. vili. 34 it is Jo. 
9. two hundred and eighteen: 1 Esd. viii. 35 gives 212, - 
10. Read and render, ‘And of the sons of Bani, Shelomith 
the son of Josiphiah,’ So LXX and 1 Esd, viii. 36. Luc. has. 
a conflate reading, ‘And the son of Shelomith, Banais the son o of 
Josiphiah,” We do not read elsewhere of a “clan Sh th, 
though of one Bani we read in ii. 10 and Neh, vii. Be 




































| with him twenty and eight males. “And of the. ee a 
of Azgad, Johanan the son of Hakkatan; and with 
im an hundred and ten males. And of thes! sone GE 15h 
Adonikam, that were the last; and these are their 
names, Eliphelet, Jeuel, and Sheidaiih; and with them =| 
Score males. And of the sons of Bipvai , Uthai and! bs 
abbud ; and with them seventy males. ” 
And I. gathered them together_to the river . that 15 
fieth to Ahava ; and there we encamped’ three days: — 
ub viewed the people, and the priests, and found theres ee 

® Another reading 1 is, Zacenr. 


f 


yi \ 


4% In previous cases after the name of the clan house) the Fs 
head of it is mentioned. Inver. 13 three names are given instead’) | 
the usual one, and in ver. 14 two. Moreover, in ver. 13 there’ 
occurs a Hebrew word rendered in the E.VV. ‘ that were. the 
" last,’ but which, restoring to the Hebrew the article (found im 
Lue. and 1 Esd. viii. 39), is more accurately rendered ‘those 
: ) came after.?. The name of the head of the members of the” 
2 that came with Ezra was unknown, but instead the historian — 
‘gives, ‘the names of three successive heads belongirig to later” 
‘generations. The same-word is probably to be understood inj = 
14, where two later heads are mentioned. Perhaps the 
[ebrew text is corrupt, or the word may have in this register 
hnical sense now lost. cnace 
‘The commonest view is that the elder branch of the clan arrived) 
Ww ith Zerubbabel (ii. 13) and that now the younger comes with = 
a. But why are three heads mentioned here and nowhere else? Loe 





15-36. Tue ASSEMBLING! OF THE PARTY: THE Journey: THE .. 
- ARRIVAL AT JeRusaLem (i Esd. viii. 41-64 (66)). 

sed, The assembly. Absence of Levites. 

15. to the river that runneth to Ahava: ‘to the running 

river (i. e.) to Ahava’; probably in contrast to the stagnant canals’. — 

about Babylon. Where this running river exactly was we have 

no means of knowing, though it must have been a'branch of the 

Euphrates and in the vicinity of Babylon. That Ahava was a- 

appears from verses 21, 31. It is called ‘Theras” in 

sd, viii. 4r. The cognate Babylonian word (#d@ru) means also 

nal’ which aes thinks must- be meant here. The verb 

lated ‘run’ means lit. ‘to come’ or ‘go.’ 

_I viewed: cf. Neh. viii. 7. 


‘7 


126, ss EZRA 8. 164, 





Ariel, for Shemaiah, and for Elnathan, and for Jarib, 
for EJnathan, and for Nathan, and for Zechariah, and 
Meshullam, chief men; also for Joiarib, and for- Elna- 
than, * which were sakes And bI sent'them forth unto 
_ Iddo the chief at the place Casiphia; and I.told them 


what they should say unto ¢Iddo, ad his brethren ‘the ~ 


1*.Or, which had understanding » Another hating’ is, 7 gave 
them commandment. ° The text as pointed has, Jddo, his, brother. 





$$ 
found there none of the sons of Levi: see for ‘the: reason” | 
general remarks on ii, 40-58. According to 1 Esd. viii. 42 and — 
Luc. there were neither priests nor Levites, but the context — 
in Ezra (ver. 2, &c.) and in 1 Esd. (viii, 29, &e,) shows that priests 
were with Ezra fromthe beginning. The fact that there was at this _ 
time as well as at the time of thé first expedition under Zerubb 
and Jeshua a dearth of Leyites is one of those “undesigned 


* coincidences’ which support the veracity of Ezra ii and the ¥ 


’ 


present context. Had Ezra’s work followed that ef Nehemiah, 
as v. Hoonacker, &c., hold, the same conditions are less ee fh 
have, presented themselves, the distance in time from © 
being 80 and 140 years, or the two dates of Ezra’s arrival, 
_16. for: omit ineach case. The preposition (2) so translated isin’ 


teachers: lit, ‘those who-caused to understand? Dr. ree . 
Rosenzweig ', followed hesitatingly by Bertholet, thinks that;there — 
was in Babylon a class distinct from -priests and Levites, whose ; 
special province it was to teach the law. But the fact that in © 
almost every case this very.word is. used in describing the work 
of the Levite goes far to show that no special class of the hed : 
indicated existed.. See Neh. viii. 7, 93 Chron. xv. 22; xxv. 8, 
&c. Besides, if there were such a separate body of o cals, why 
have we no clear reference to it? _ The same word in Neh, viii. ay: 
X. 29, means ‘those who discern.’ oe 

17. I sent, &c,: render, ‘I, gave\them a commission ‘(or *co ; 
mandment’) to Iddo, head over (the Jewish colony) at the p Ee! a 
Casiphia (a Jewish centre in Babylon) 5 -and tata: and I told thea eed 


1 Das Fahrhundert nach dem babylon, Exile, Beet a! iv 
: sok 





a es hand of our God upon us they prausil 
‘a man of discretion, of the sons of Mahli, the son of, 


Hine Or, Tshsechel 


into their ifidath ‘cf. Exod. iv. 15) what they were to say 
9 Iddo and his brethren the Levites and the Nethinim,’ &c.) ! 
_ The Hebrew text must be changed, for as it stands it means 
“to Iddo and his brother the Nethinim.’’ The changes to this). : 
m the fuller text, implied in the above translation, could be 
ily made by a copyist, as a student of the original will see. 
We do not know anything further than this verse tells us of 
‘this Iddo or of the Jewish settlement at Casiphia. 
. ministers: the word is general, and can include priests 
Num, iii. 6, &c.) as well as Levites, Nethinim, &c. The Lae 
Luc.), misreading one Hebrew consonant, reads ‘ singers.’ 
according to the good hand of our God: see on vii, 6, 


ne) parallel to~Sherebiah. For a similar proper name -see 
, x. 6, Ish-tob (A. V.), not ‘men of Tob’ as R. V: (see Kittel 
C dde on). Why call an unnamed Levite ‘a discreet man poe 
ere the other Levites ‘indiscreet’? 


dson of Levi. For ‘son’ (6en).= descendant see on vii. iS 

. with him: we have here simply the sign of the accusa- 

(they brought... Jeshaiah), with the wrong vowels inserted. 
o LXX (not Luc.), 1 Esdras, Guthe, Bertholet. 

| his (brethren) : read ‘ their ' : sot Esd, (Luc.) viii. 47, Guthe, 

nolet ; cf. ‘their sons.’ 

= “Nethinim ; see on il, 43-54. ‘ 

given: the Hebrew word (nathan) is, used with a reference 

e current view of the etymology of Nethinim (persons cue 

ated to God)... 

mvice: i.e. religious service. The same Hebrew want 

ae in Exod. xxx. 16 and xxxviii. 21. The Nethinim 








a man of discretion: read ‘Ishsechel’ as R. Vm., a proper — a 


_Mahili was son of Merari (Exod. vi. 16, 19) and therefore : 
























ot 











>’ 


ar expressed by name. Then T’proclaimed ‘a fast the 
22 Our little ones, and for all our substance: © For’ 


*-we had spoken unto’ the king, saying, The‘ hand of « 


~ and the sacrificing constituted a prayer for help: < 




































ae ies 


198s EZRA 8 | 
two" hundred and twenty Nethinim: all 


the river Ahava, that we might humble oursélyes be 
our God, to seek of him a straight way, for us, and 


ashamed to ask of the king a band 6f soldiers and hor . 
men to help us against the enemy in ‘the way : 


expressed: lit. ‘ perforated, punctured, marked with a point. * 

~ See Lev. xxiv. 11 (cf. Dillmann and Baentsch on); Num. i. 173 
r Chron. xii. 31, &c. The sense seems to be that in a complete 
register the names of these persons were ticked off to i 
the presence of the persons.! Rabbinical writers say the verb 
came to mean simply ‘to name,’ and it is so rendered here by 
the Syr.,.Vulg., ‘were called by their names.’ See on x, 16. ~~ 
21+30. Preparations forthe journey. The incidents related in verses ~ 
15-30 must have taken place during the three days of encan 
at the river Ahava (ver. 15), i. e. from 9th to reth Nisan (ver. 


21-23. The fast. Fasting is here a sign of humiliation before 
God and an acknowledgement of dependence upon Him dt: 
the journey about to be begun: see Dan’ x. i2; Ps. xxv. | 
Similarly, before going forth to war, it was the cistom rae 
sacrifice to Yahweh (1 Sam. vii.9; 1 Mace. iii. 47, &¢.). ete 


21. I proclaimed @ fast: see x. 6; Neh. viii. r; 2 C 
xx. 3; Isa. i. 13; Joel i. 14, &c. The verb here’ (te ‘call y 
is particularly used of proclaiming feast and fast days. See i 4 
for another verb which with a noun is translated  m é 
_ tion” (see on i. f). ; 

a straight way: i.e. a prosperous journey} see 1s 3; 
which is probably referred to, and where the’ same word ocetirs. 
little ones: render, ‘wives and little ones:’ The Hebrew 
word used has, according to Dillmann (sée on’ \Exed. xii: 37), 
the sense ‘ wives and children’ in the Pentateuch source 
it is perfectly right, with Bertholet, to give it that wider’ serise 
here. See Holzinger, Hexateuch, p. 287; see also Num. ‘xxxiie 16, 
17, 24; Judges xviii. ar. 

substance : see on i. 4, where the word is trannduted ‘ goods.’ 

22. a band, &c.: Nehemiah did not scruple to’ aecept such 
protection : Neh. ii, 6 

enemy: ‘i.e. Bedouin and other robbers such as” travel 
_ encounter to- day. No ole foe is thought of. 








K hein that seek him, for good ; but his - 
wer “afaet ‘his wrath is against all them that forsake him. — 
we fasted and besought our God for this : and he was 23 — 
eated of us. Then I separated twelve of the chiefs of 24 
® priests, Peven Sherebiah, Hashabiah, and ten of their 
ethren with them, and weighed unto them the silver, 25 : 

‘and the gold, and the vessels, even the offering for the Ds 


























ents of silver, and silver vessels an hundred talents ; of 





|. * In Neh. xii. 24, Levites. > Or, besides 
; The hand of our God: see on vii. 6. pe 
seek: the Hebrew word here denotes in general to seek for pee: 


‘something that has been lost, and not to seek to know about : see 
on iv. 2 and vii. 10, 3 Sime 
24-30. Guardians appointed for the gifts and offerings. 
__ 24. Render, ‘Then I set apart twelve of the chiefs of the  — 
riests, together with Sherebiah, Hashabiah, and ten of their 
ethren with them.’ Ezra selected two groups of twelve, one 
_ being priests, the other Levites, as is implied in ver. 30. On the — 

number 12 see p. 51, 

chiefs of the priests: not high-priests, but leading members 
the priestly class; lit, ‘ princes of the priests.’ “ae 
even: for the prep. (J) in Hebrew, which. introduces the an 
“accusative see on ver. 16; but read here with 1. Esd.‘and’or‘in 
"addition to’ (see R. Vm. ). as 

_ Sherebiah and Hashabiah were Levites not priests. a See 

3 25. See on vil. 15 f. and Io. : 

weighed: | gold and silver coins are, even now yalued in ts 
anks, &e., by, weight ; but in ancient times coins were not used, ._— 
d the precious metals were weighed, Shekel means hers . 
what is weighed out. 
the offering: lit, ‘what is lifted up,” so ‘a present,’ Beis 
a word much. uséd in the P code, but hardly if at all before D, 
denotes in a general way a sacred gift, an offering to God, Ke, PEA 
e- Deut, xii, 6, 11; Ezek. xliv. 30, &c. beet 
jhere present: ‘Heb. ‘that could be found,’ i.e. that happened — 
present ; see on Esther i. 5. aad 
six hundred and fifty talents of silver: i.e. nearly ~ 
r of a million pounds sterling (see on vii, 22). .A silver 








130 pea ~RPRA 8. 2 








thousand darics; and two vessels of fine beck 1 
"28 precious as gold. - And I said unto them, Ye are hi 
unto the Lorp, and the vessels are holy ; and the sil 
* and the gold are a freewill offering unto the Lorp, the 4 
a9 God of your fathers. Watch ye, and keep them, un €. 
weigh them before the chiefs of the priests and the — 
_ Levites, and the princes of the fathers’ Louses of Israel, 
- at Jerusalem, in the chambers of the house of the LorD. 


\ 





(and silver vessels) an hundred talents: the value of the 
silver would be approximately £360,000. 
of gold an hundred talents: a gold talent had the value of 
something over £6,000, The sense intended here is, however, 
probably the value of roo talents of silver (see above) in nUEECES 
of gold: so Meyer (see of. cit., p. 69). The values given seem to ~ 
us very high, but they are not at all improbable, according 
to Meyer, who is not a theologian but perhaps the greatest living 
historian of Persia: see on vii. 22. b 
27. bowls of gold : : see on i, ro. ' 
daries: see on ii. 60. ~~ 
28. The bearers are holy, and what they bear with them is. 
holy too, a 
; the God of your fathers: see on vii. 28. a 
“29. chiefs of the priests and the Levites: sce on ver. 24 
princes, &c.: read with || 1 Esd., Guthe, Bertholet > Hal P 
heads of the fathers’ howses’ : see on i. 5 and cf. iii. r2; : Chron. — 
xxix. 6. The same Hebrew word is rendered in "the R : es . 
chiefs and princes. The priests and Levites in charge of | 
gifts on the journey (ver. 24) were, on reaching Jerusalem, to band 
them over to the representatives of the priests, Levites, and laity 
already in that city. We have perhaps to conceive of 4 college or ~ 
governing body appointed by each of the classes mentioned, 
chambers: it is better to keep this term for the Hebrew ; 
word (se/a‘) which stands for the rooms’ built iminediately in con- 
tact with the Temple (see 1 Kings vi. 5; 1 Chron. xxxviii. 12),' Dd 
to employ the word ‘cell’ for the Hebrew word (liskhah) in 
present verse (so DB. iv.-699", art. ‘Temple”). There w re Bind 
of these ‘cells’ around the outer walls of the duter court of Eze-— 
kiel’s temple : see Ezek. xl. 17-47, xlii. 1 ff; and ef Ezra = 6x6 ad 
Neh. x. 37, xiii. 4-7 and x Chron. ix. Ps They were used as 
store-rooms for Temple vessels, provisions, &c., but priests r resided 
in some of them: see x. 6; Ezek, xl. 46, &c. 


4 


’ 









ver and the gold, and the vessels, to bring them to 
Jerusalem unto the house of our God. 
_ + Then we departed from the river of Ahava on the 31 
twelfth day of the first month, to gounto Jerusalem: and 
the hand of our God was upon us, and he delivered us _ 
from the hand of the enemy and the lier in wait by the 
“way. And wecamie to Jerusalem, and abode there three 32 
days. And. on the fourth - day was the silver and the 33 
gold and the vessels weighed in the house of our God 
“Binto the hand of Meremoth the son of Uriah the priest ; 
and with him was Eleazar the son of Phinehas ; and with 
j them was Jozabad the son of Jeshua, and Noadiah the 
son of Binnui, the Levites; the whole by number and 34. 
4 by weight: and all the siden? was written at that time. 
® Or, by 






























30. priests ... Levites: see on ver. 24. 
31-34. The departure; arrival at Jerusalem ; delivery of the gifts. 
31. first month: i.e. Nisan, about our April. 
hand, &c.: see on vii. 6. 
', enemy: see on ver. 22, and cf. next clause. 
32. we came: for the direction of the journey see on Vii. 9. ~ 
three days: Nehemiah and his party also rested for three 
i Gee after reaching Jerusalem: see Neh. ii. rr. 
83. the house, &c.: i. e. into the célls or store-rooms : see on 
- ver. 29. : 
* Meremoth: see Neh, iii. 4,21. There was some doubt as to 
the priestly origin of the family (402) when Zerubbabel and his party 
eached Jerusalem ; see Neh. vii. 63; but see t Chron. xxix. 2o. 
- Eleazar: see on vili. 2. 
Jozabad: mentioned in x. 23 and in Neh, vii. 7 (see a as 
a Levite. 


vets 


eestor Binunui is named in Neh, x. ro and xii. 8 as a Levite. 
’ ‘Tt will be seen that, as the gifts and offerings were in charge of 
welve priests andtwelve Levites during the journey (See on ver. 24), 
50. they are received at the Temple by two priests and two Levites. 
__, 34. by number: i. e. the vessels. 
"by weight: i. e. the gold and silver. 
at that time: to be joined with the next verse, as by 


K 2 


_Noadiah: not mentioned elsewhere, but his father or an- — 28 


fag ee: 3 SAHA 8 ae 







artle, affered burnt offerings unto the God of - 
twelve bullocks for all Israel, ninety. and six 
_- seventy and seven lambs, twelve he-goats for a sin and 
36 ing : all this was a burnt offering unto the Lorp. 
they delivered the king’s commissions unto the king 
satraps, and to the governors beyond the river: and they — 
furthered the people and the house of God. aes 


the LXX (not Luc., nor 1 Esd.). There were no puncte 
- marks in Hebrew when Ezra-Nehemiah was written, though the 
recently discovered Aramaic Papyri show that words were usuz 
separated. a= : 
35. Sacrifice of thanksgiving. “or 
children of the captivity: Ezra and his party just returged 
_ from exile : see on ii. 1 and iv. r. iS 
offered, &c. : see vi. 17, where we read of the very sini) 
' sacrifices offered by Zerubbabel and his party when the Temple was. P 
_ dedicated. 
( pullocks...rams...lambs: seeonvi.17. The number 4 
‘of these offered was larger on the occasion implied in vi. 17. 
twelve he-goats : see on vi. 17. by <p 
sin offering: see on vi. 17- 
all this was a burnt offering: i. e. was wholly an * 
36. the king’s commissions : see especially vii. 21f., 24. 
satraps: the word in the M.T, (from which through. the — 
Greek our word is derived) is Persian, and occurs nowhere else 
in Ezra-Nehemiah, but it is found thrice in Esther and eight time ins 
Daniel. There was but one’satrap in Transpotamia (see on 
10), but the heads of contiguous satrapies (Egypt, &c.) would need 
to be informed of the king’s instructions, Darius divi So 
dominions into twenty provinces or satrapies : see on iat Ee 
governors: sub-satraps, rulers of parts of the Transpota’ ] 
_ satrapy. Samaria, Judah, &c. But the same Heb, and jee 
ee: cf. Persian pasha) has the meaning ‘satrap’ in v. 6, vi. 6, 
eh. iii. 7. 4 
satraps and governors occur together, and therefore with a ’ 
different meaning, besides here i in Dan. iii. 2; Esther iii. 12, vili.9, ; 
ix. 3. The word for ‘governor’ has its narrow sense in Hag. 
10, ii. 1, 21 (Zerubbabel, the sub-satrap or governor of Judah). 
Meyer! says that the Assyrian pakhat, Hebrew and ‘Arete 
pekhah, was in the Persian period the usual term (so Greek 
érapxos) representing the Persian for ‘ satrap,’ the latter oce 













1 Entstehung, 31 f. (n.), 





ey 


what of the present passage? He is hardly right in his state- 
nt that pekhah has this wider meaning (as satrap) throughout 
a-Nehemiah, Haggai, and Mal.i.8. As a matter of fact, it 
sver has this sense in Haggai or Malachi, and but occasionally 
Beva-Nehemish : see on Neh. ii. 9. 


IX f. (1 Esd. viii. 68-ix. 36). 


Ra’s GRIEF AT HEARING OF THE MIxED MarRIAGES AND THE — 
MEASURES HE TOOK TO PUT AN END TO THEM. 


ost every point) Neh. vii. 70-73 joins immediately on to Ezra viii. - 


with the preceding list from the document which has its primary 
- place in ch. ii’ (see introductory remarks to that chapter); so 


Konig, Kosters, Ryle, Baudissin, Bertholet, Siegfried, Ke. 

_. Torrey and Kent make Neh. vii. 73°-x (with some excepted — 

parts) follow Neh. vii. 73°. The sequence of events would in that 
_case be as follows :— 

1. The arrival at Jerusalem ; Ezra and the incidents which im- 

ediately followed, Ezra vii. 32-36 + Neh. vii. 7o-73°. 

-2. The public reading of the law, Neh. vii. 73>-viii. 1-12. 

3- Observance of the Feast of Tabernacles, Neh. viii. 13-18. 
. Ezra’s crusade against mixed marriages, Ezraix-x+1 Esd. 

“68-ix. 36. 


former) place No. 4 second in the above sequence of events, the 
order then being (using the above numbers) 1, 4, 2, 3. 

_ Torrey says that on arriving at Jerusalem the first thing 
which Ezra was likely to do was to read the law. He was an 
spert in the law of Moses (Ezra vii. 6), and had brought it with | 
m (ver. 14) that he might teach and apply it (verses 25 f.). 

According to the M. T., 1 Esd.and Josephys, Ezra’s first experi- 
eon reaching Jefusalem (after what is related in Ezra viii. 31-36) 
‘was to be informed of the mixed marriages, whereupon he deals 
ith the same. Then, according to 1 Esd. and Josephus, the law 
fas read. That is, 1 Esd. and Josephus place Neh. vii. 73*-x 
mediately after Ezra x, not as Torrey after Ezra vii It is 


Neh. vii. 73°, &c.)..- 


| fairly settled down in Jerusalem? Torrey-says that Ezra 
| read and explain the law which he had brought with him. 


Composition, &c., 29 ff. 
ee Historical and ee eres Narratives, 369 ff. 





ccording to Torrey‘ and Kent? (who slavishly follows him at 


Whatis most likely to have happened immediately after Ezra 


Ttis, however, quite clear that these verses were copied inconnexion ~ 


1 Esd, and Josephus (who, however, generally follows thes 


assumed here that Neh. vii. 73°-x is in its wrong place, for it is _ S 
ra’s history that it gives, and it belongs therefore to Ezra (Se@ eam 


r : We, 
aly in OT. writings ae the Seleucid period (Daniel, Esther ae 


> 






Schrader, R. Smend, Ryssel, Kuenen, Stade, Cornill, Driver, : 





























— 
ts 





) - Now when these things were done, 


' heathen, he would at once seek to remove this evil, for it ate. 


‘had not informed him. It is hard to conceive of the events 


“would be to read to this regenerate society the laws which belon 


to take place we have the testimony of 1 Esd. and Josephus as to 4 


~ in vii. 8, viii. 33, and x. 8f. Inasmuch as Ezra arrived me: 















It seems to the present writer much more probable that on 
covering how his fellow countrymen had intermarried with 


the very root of Judaism as then conceived, What is the use < fa 
Jewish law unless you have .a pure Jewish people? Ezra could 
not but have perceived the evil immediately after he had be 
to look around, even if the princes (or nobles? see on Ezra im 


Neh. vii. 73°-viii. 18 happening without the most distant refe 
to what caused Ezra the greatest surprise and the profoundest . 
On the contrary, having discovered the extent to which iis : 
people had departed from the faith and practice of their fathers, — 
and having induced them to live a separate life and thus to consti- 
tute a Jewish community, a church nation, the next natural > 


a 
te} 
s, 


to them, and which were intended for their guidance. He m | 
have a Jewish people before he will teach the law which was held 
to belong pre-eminently to that people. In addition to any force - 
that may lie in the above a priori reasoning as to what was likely 
















what actually occurred. See further on Neh. vii! 73”, &c. hi 4 


1-5. Ezra’s astonishment and grief at hearing of the 
marriages. ; 
1. when these things were done: lit. ‘had been finiatied’t 
‘brought to an end.’ The same phrase almost verbatim occurs in 
x Chron. xxxi, 1, and the verbin a similar form in 2 Chron. xx. 23, 
xxiv. 14, due to the fact that the Chronicler copied the ol 

narrative in the present connexion. 

By ‘these things’ we are to understand the events recdae 
in ch, viii. We have obviously to think of a period immediately 
following Ezra’s arrival to account for his surprise on hearing f 
of the mixed marriages. We have other jpdications of time 











sacred gifts were handed over to the priests and Levites in 
fifth month (vii. 8), and the genéral assembly to deal with 
mixed marriages met in the ninth month (x. 8 f.), we have in the: 
present verse to think of a time somewhere between the fifth and 
ninth month of the year 458 B.C. 

princes : Hebrew sarim, the national leaders in civil at 
military matters, not necessarily members of the royal family ; Cran 
the strict sense of the English word. In the post-exilic Jewish 
community the Hebrew word came probably to denote the heads” 
of the Jerusalem clans, priestly, Levitical, and lay. See G. A. 
Smith, Jerusalem, i. 382ff., where the now common ae 
defended that sarim= = government officials. ; 





Bice the peoples of the lands, doing according to ueae 
- abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the 
tizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, 
he Egyptians, and the Amorites. For.they have taken 





The people of Israel, &c.: render, ‘ The people (including) 
‘Israel (=the common people), the priests and the Levites,’ &c. 
The translation ‘ people of Israel’ is allowed by the Hebrew ac- 
“cording to a rather rare construction (‘nom. apposition”), but in 
any case three classes are mentioned. See on x.-25. 

the peoples of the lands: see oniii. 3. The races men- 
tioned must not be literally understood. They are given merely 
as samples of what is meant. There could be no Hittites now in 
Palestine, and hardly Perizzites or Jebusites: on the last see p: 233. 
Here it is implied that marriage with any non-Jewish people 
was forbidden. The older law prohibited marriage with Canaan- 


xxili. 3; cf. Neh. xiii. 1), but allowed marriage with Edomites 
and Egyptians (Deut. xxiti. 2). The law in Deut. xxi. 10f. per- 
“mitted marriage with non-Jews who were not Canaanites: see on 
vi. 21. Ezra must have felt that the continued existence of Judaism 


with others: cf. Ezek. xliv, 

- doing ... abominations: render, ‘as regards their abomina- 
tions.’ This last word denotes here not idolatrous practices as 
"marriages. 

which commonly introduces an enumeration of details. 


: Canaanites: dwellers in the lowlands west of the central 
iatentain range of Palestine, though the word cannot be proved 


as generally i in Babylonian, the word ‘ Amorites’ is used. 
=e _ the Amorites: read (with 1 Esd. viii. 66) ‘the Edomites.’ 


a _ holy seed: i.e. the people (so often in Heb.) separated, in 
e to God: see Isa. vi. 13 ; and cf. Exod. xix. 5f.; 1 Pet. ii. 5. 


of their daughters for themselves and for their sons; so 
that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the 


ites, Ammonites, and Moabites (see Exod. xxxiv. 16; Deut. vii. 3, 


rendered it necessary to put an end to the intermarriage of Jews 


‘usually (Deut. xviii. 9; 1 Kings xiv. 24, &c.), but the mixed 


have taken: as wives. So x. 44; 2 Chron. xi. 21, xiii. 21. - 




























) 


even of: better, ‘viz.?. In Hebrew a preposition (J) is used — 


from either Heb. or Aram. etymology to mean ‘lowlander.?. In J 
and eorresponding parts of the O. T., as in the Tel-el-Amarna 
tablets, Canaanites are the original inhabitants of West Palestine 
(see Amos i li. 9), a sense in which in E and D (Deut. i, 27, &c. Ds 


‘translated ‘princes’: so Meyer, — 132 fi, Bertholet, 
_ Benzinger, Bib. Arch. ®, 263. at 







3 *rulers hath been b chief 1 in this trespass. Atid: 
heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, and 
plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, 


4 sat down astonied. Then were assembled unto me eve 


one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel, be- 
cause of the trespass of them of the captivity ; and I sat a 
5 Pes 


® Or, deputies > Or, first 





mingled themselves: by marriage. The same verb in 
Same sense occurs in Ps. cvi. 34 f. a ‘ 
peoples of the lands: see on iii. 8. : tae 
princes: see on ver, I. “are 
rulers: the Hebrew word here is probablya marginal gloss: . 


- only one word occurs in the LXX, though in 1 Esd. viii. 7o —— 


and great men’) and in the Syr. (‘elders and Toviven: *) there 

are two, as in the M. T. The Hebrew word here isa transliterated — 
form of the Assyrian Shaknu (a general, a governor of a provi F 
and is in Bane Nebentak almost certainly a synonym for the word — 


R 


3. I rent my (inner) garment and my. (outer)? mantle: pag 
similar manifestations of grief and indignation see Gen. xxxvii, 29, — 
34; Lev. x. 6; Joshua vii; Judges xi. 35; Job i. 20, &c.; ee Z 
Esther iv. 1. 

and plucked off (Heb. some of) the hair of my head: babies 
ness is a sign of deep sorrow in Job i: 20; Ezek. vii. 18; Amos — 
viii. to, but in these cases the hair is apparently shaved off (see _ 
especially Job i. 20). See Homer’s Odyssey, x end: ‘They sat) 
. lamented and plucked each his hair.’ Plucking off the hair-of — 
another i is a sign of indignation (Neh, xiii. 25) or of cruelty (Isa. 16), _ 
my beard: plucking the beard as a sign of grief, nowhere a 
else mentioned in the O. T. ae 
astonied: Old English for ‘astonished’ in the sense of being — 


_ ‘bewildered,’ ‘ dumbfounded,’ which is a comthon meaning of the i 


Hebrew word i in either the transitive (Dan. xi. 31) oF intransitive” 
(Job xxi. 5; Ezek. iii: 15) sense. er at 
4. every one that trembled, &c.: see x. 3; Isa lxvii 2. 0 
at the words, &c.: i.e. at the consequences of infringing _ 
enactments on the Divine law forbidding the sin in question, ——_ 
because of the trespass of them of the captivity: these — 
words carry with them the implication that, contrary to Kosters’ 
view, ther€ was a return before that of Ezra: see Introd. p. 23 fi, 
and for trespass see on’x. 2. 






> ‘EZRA 9.5. PEGI a 































onied until the evening oblation. And at the even- § 
ig Oblation I arose up from my * humiliation, eyen with 
y garment and my mantle rent; and I fell upon my 
knees, and spread out my hands unto the Lorp my God ; 

* Or, fasting 


astonied? see on v. 3. 

_ Until the evening oblation: i.e, until the evening. Similarly 
t Kings xviii. 29 and Judges ix. 1. Seeon iii.5. In 2 Kings 
vi. 5 we read of the morning burnt offering (flesh) and of the 
€vening meal (vegetable) offering. The latter is the word em- 
ployed here, and, denoting primarily a gift, is used for a sacrifice 
_ of any kind. It came to denote specially the meal or vegetable offer- 
‘ings which in post-exilic times (P) accompanied the burnt offering 
{see Exod. xxix. 42; Num. xxviii. 3-8). 

In late pre- -exilic times the minkhah or meal offering was 
presented in the evening (see 2 Kings xvi. 15; cf. 1 Kings xviii. 
29, 36). This custom seems to be implied in Neh. x. 33 (34), see 
The exact time of this sacrifice was perhaps that called in 
r literature ‘between the two evenings,’ i.e, probably) be- 
tween the beginning of sunset and dark (see Exod. xii. 6 and 
~ Num. xxviii. 4). According to Ezekiel’s programme (Ezek. xlvi. 
-15) the burnt and meal offerings were to be assigned to the 
orning alone. The later custom presented a burnt offering, as 
/also a meal and a drink offering (as the accompaniment of the 
first), both morning and evening: see Exod. xxix. 38-42 and 
an um. xxviii. 3-8 (both late P). F 


5-15. Ezra’s confession (\\1 Esd. viii. 7o .(72)-87 (89)). Note 
strong Deuteronomic and Jeremianic colouring of this prayer 
of that in Neh. ix. 6-38, and observe how Ezra identifies 
self with the nation in its guilt, according to the ancient 
principle of the oneness or solidarity of society (see Psalms, vol. ii, 
in this series, pp. 21, 195, and 218). The prayer in Dan. ix. 4-19 
as this same feature. 

_ 5. the evening oblation: see onv. 4. 

'. humiliation: so (rightly) the LXX (including Luc.). The 
Heb. noun occurs here only in the O. T., though the cognate verb 
=*to be humbled,’ ‘afflicted ’) is of frequent occurrence. In post- 
iblical Hebrew it denotes ‘fasting,’ and in |jt Esd. and R. V 
(wrongly) so translated. 

- with my garment... rent: not asecondtime: see ver. 3. 
: fell upon my knees: see 1 Kings viii. 54 and Dan. vi. te. 
But prayer was offered standing also : ; See 1 Sam. i. 9g; 1 Kings 
225 Matt. v. 5- : 

















+ é 


6 and I said, O my God, I am ashamed and blush t 

up my face to thee, my God » for our iniquities 2 
_ creased over our head, and our guiltiness is grown 
7 unto the heavens. Since the days of our fathers we 
been * exceeding guilty unto this day ; and for our i 
ties have we, our kings, and our priests, been deliver 
into the hand of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to 
captivity, and to spoiling, and to confusion of face, as it 
8 is this day. “And now for a little: moment grace | 
* Heb. in great guiltiness, 





ix. 27, xvii. 11; 1 Kings viii. 22; 2 Chron. vi. 12 f,; Isa. i. 
2 Mace. iii. 20, In early times the custom was in prayer ii 
spread the hands towards the altar, the supposed abode of deity. 
See many representations of such on Egyptian monuments. 
In later times the face was turned during prayer towards Jerusa- : 
lem (see 2 Chron. vi. 34; Dan. vi. rr), as among the Jews still, ae : 
as Moslems pray looking towards Mecca. Perhaps, however, } 
raising of the hands and eyes (Ps, cxxiii. 1, see on in Century ; 
in prayer is a survival of astral religion. Some anthropologists 
hold that when in prayer the hands were first raised it was in depre- 
cation, the open parts of the hands being turned towards the deity. 
6. See Jer. vi. 15, viii. 12. we? 

4 Iam ashamed and blush: the same two verbs in Jer. xe 
_ 19 and viii. 12, and in another form (Hiphil) in Jer.vi. 15. The second 
verb, from a ‘root =" to strike,’ has reference to the pain accom- 
panying the feeling of shame, and might be rendered ‘ a0 tt 
' for our iniquities are increased over our head, so 4 
they are like to overwhelm us. See Ps. xxxviii. 4. we 4 
our guiltiness (= liability to punishment) . . . unto ‘the ; 





heavens: the same figure 2 Chron, xxviii. 9. 
7. See Neh. ix. 32 and cf. Dan. ix. 7. a 
kings of the lands: i. e. of heathen lands, but the retarshddis’ 
in particular to the kings of Assyria and Babylon : see Neh. ix. 32 
confusion: lit. ‘ shame.’ 
as it is this day: it is for their iniquities that they are KBw | 
subject to the king of Persia. Their sufferings are due to their sins. 
8. And now: i. e. since Zerubbabel’s return. 
for a little moment: the space of eighty years since Cyrus 
issued his decree is small in comparison with the long periods 
of Israel’s rebellion and punishment. For the expression see” 
Isa. xxvi. 20. ae ene P 
grace: i.e. ‘favour’. Except here and in Joshua xivg 










































t to escape, and to give us a “nail in his holy place,. 
at our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little 


= : @ See Is. xxii. 23, 





notes, however, ‘ to show pity,’ or ‘favour.’ 

to leave us a remnant to escape: better, ‘leaving us 
‘eg remnant of escaped ones,’ the last two words representing 
Hebrew word (‘that which has escaped’) used in Exod. 
. 5 and Joel ii. 3 of the land which escaped the ravages 
of the locusts. This Hebrew word is a great one in 
Isaiah for that part of Israel which survived the judgements of 
fahweh: see Isa. iv. 2; x.!° 10,0xxxvii.o 31 f.» Here it 
lay have this general Isaianic sense, but it seems probable 
im the light of verses 13-15 and especially of Neh. i. 2. that 
the returned exiles are meant. In reckoning up the forces for 
ig hteousness, Ezra and Nehemiah take little account of the 
who were not removed into exile. 


), as is that of the preceding phrase, and must have here the 
é sense as in the original passage. A nail fastened into 
wall to hold utensils is fixed and immovable. The ‘ remnant of 


‘Jerusalem (his holy place). The word translated nail means 
o tent-pin, and most expositors think the figure is that of a tent 
ade and kept firm by the various pins driven into the ground 
ee Isa. liv. 2). But the reference is to Isa. xxii. 23, and we 
ave ‘nail’ (or ‘ pin’), not ‘ nails* (‘pins’). In || 1 Esdras for 
ail’ we find ‘ root and name.’ 

may lighten our eyes: i.e. may give us the joy which 
lows caagal in bright ae eyes. The same figure in 1 Sam. 


in t Bras i is ‘to discover our light ? (or ‘lightbearer’) ‘in the 
use of the Lord our God,’ which Guthe reads here. also. 

_ @ little reviving (|| 1 Esdras, ‘food’: so the Heb. word in 
Judges vi. 4 xvii. 10). The writer seems to have in mind 
Ezek, xxxvii, 1-14, where the restoration of the nation to Jeru- 
em is graphically set forth under the figure of the reviving of 


sure (cf. little) taken place. 

“in our bondage : see ver. 9. 

bondmen: being subject to the Persian government. The 
ited expressions referring to the subjection in verses 8f, 


viving in our bondage. For we are bondmen ; yet our 9 


rew word has the sense of supplication. The verbal root ~ 


’ to give us a mail: the language’is based on Isaiah (xxii. — 


caped ones’ is the nail now at length restored and established 


d bones. The realization of this prediction has in some ~ 


¥ 


_ give us a reviving, to set up the house of our God, a 
repair the * ruins thereof, and to give us a» wall in Ju 
‘to and in Jerusalem. And now, O our God, what sha 


sa which thou hast commanded by thy servants the prophi 


" Xxix. 5, and in contrast Isa: xxxvi, 57. 












<A aloe BARA 9. 0,94 


tended mercy unto us in the sight of the vag of Pe 


say after this? for we have forsaken thy command 


‘saying, The land, unto. which ye go to possess it, is ae i 
unclean land through the uncleanness of the peoples 0 of. 
* Or, waste places > Or, fence . ; 


hath extended mercy unto us: render, ‘has shown | Us 
favour.’ ‘Sikes 
the kings of Persia: i. e. Cyrus, DariusI, and Avena Ss 
to give... ta set up...and to repadty &e. : render 
‘giving .. . setting up... and repairing,’ &c. We have 
an enumeration of three ways in which God displayed His-favour 3 
to the nation: (1) He restored them, or at least some of them: 
see on ver. & (a little reviving). (2) He enabled them to 
rebuild the Temple structure (see iii-vi), even to restore et em 
ae 
2 





which had been pulled down or injured. (3) He defended them 
‘from their enemies round about. 

a wall: to be understood figuratively as in R.V, ‘a fence, 
‘giving us protection against our foes in the city and its oundanaee 
setting as it were a hedge about them, such as surrounds a se 
yard (see Isa. v. 5 and Ps. Ixxx. 12, where the same rere ah 

used). _ The walls of Jesuselze cannot be meant, as they were n¢ 
yet built (see Neh. ii. 11-17) ; and besides, such walls could 
surround ‘Jerusalem and Judah.’ Kosters’ argument from this 2 
verse that this chapter has its right place after Nehemiah falls © e 
thus to the ground. Oettli explains: ‘Has made us a separate, 
independent community,’ na) 
11. which thou hast commanded by thy servants the 4 
prophets: no such words occur in the prophetical or any other 4 
parts of the O.T. Ezra seems to be giving the gist of what the — 
law taught: see Lev. xviii. 24 f., 27. We should, however, have - 
expected ‘ Moses’ and not the prophets to have been menti ; 
in harmony with the custom) in Ezra and Nehemiah when | the 
~ laws of the Pentateuch are referred to. My 
unclean land: the exact expression occurs nowhere eet J 
the O.T. In Lev. xviii. 25 the Hebrew words so translated nee 
lit. ‘a land made.‘ (or ‘that has become’) ‘unclean.’ 











rom one-end to another with their filthiness. Now 
efore give not your daughters unto their sons, neither 


= 





2. eine not your danghters, &c.: so substantially Deut. 


3: 
‘nor seek, &c.: so Deut. xxiii. 6. 
peace: the Hebrew wordembraces in its meaning whatever i is 


eis 


Century Bible). 

that ye may be strong: see Deut. xi. 8. ; 
and eat the good of the land: see Isa. i. 19 and Gen. 
io, 


unishment, our nation is, contrary to thy command, once more 
= SS tous? But thou art faithful to thy word, and dost preserve 
_ a retnnant though we are guilty. 

3. One restraining thought alone is mentioned : the suffering 
of the nation on account of its sin, The words seeing that, &c., 


serving, was beyond the actual PEniSnErent. 


4 he original, which might be more literally rendered: ‘ Thou hast 
slented’ (the same verb in Isa. xiv. 6) or, ‘Thou hast restrained 


mar ne natar ‘to keep”) ‘according to a scale of sins fewer 


_ Other renderings of the verse are: (1) ‘Thou hast held back 


eference to ver. 6 (‘our iniquities are increased over our 
ds’): So Siegfried, &c. (2) ‘ Thou ‘hast judged us’ (altering 


ands, through their Sominalione pbich have filled ‘ 


<e their daughters unto your sons, nor seek their peace 
or their prosperity for ever: that ye may be strong, and =~ 


upon us fe our evil Beet and for our great guilt, seeing Ka 
that thou our God hast punished us less than our iniqui- — 


ssential to perfect well- Arenas see on v. 7 and on Ps. cxix, 165 - 


~~ 13-15. Is it possible that, notwithstanding the lesson of our — 


guilty of intermarrying with foreigners? Wilt thou not puf an — 


to the end of the verse are intended to show that the guilt, thesis 


_God hast punished us less, &c. : this is the correct senseof — 


ly anger” (the word ‘ anger! is to be supplied with the verbs. 


n ours’: i.e. ‘Thou hast treated us better than our sins 


sonie of our sins,’ i.e: prevented them from overwhelming use 

























Fores 











ne Hebrew letter for another like it) ‘more favourably than our 
is deserved’: so” he Bertholet, Buhl. (3) ‘Thou hast — 
























14 ties deserve, and hast given us s ch a remn: 
_ again break thy commandments, and join 
with the peoples that do these: abpininetions? w 
_~ got thou be angry with us till thou hadst consumed 
15 that there should be no remnant, nor any to escape? 
Lorp, the God of Israel, thou art righteous; fory 
left a remnant that is escaped; as it is this day: -b 

we are before thee in our guiltiness ; for none can stand 
before thee because of this. 
10 [C,] Nowwhile Ezra prayed,and made splenic W 
ing«and casting himself down before the house of € 


14. shall we again break, &c.: better, ‘do we again,’ 
They were actually guilty of this sin: see ver. 15. The fo 
the Hebrew verb (imperfect) can be translated by the resent 
by the future. 

again: referring to the fact implied in Deut. vii. 1-7, 
the Israelites had been guilty of inte AAE with the natives 
reaching Canaan from Egypt, nO ne Wwe 

join in affinity : lit, ‘become sons in law.’ . 

the peoples that do (lit. ‘of’) these abessinations: 
and 1 Esdras: ‘the people of these lands’ (or ‘religions’), 

. ing a rather similarly written Hebrew word which may be th 
original one:) see on iii, 3. ; ital eae 

abominations: sée on ver. I. f 

remnant: lit. ‘what is left over’ (after a sifting process 
punishment). thot 

any to escape: one. word in Hebrew—that ag 
remnant in ver. 13. : 

15. righteous: i.e. ‘faithful’ according to the late. 
found in Isa. xl. ff. So 1 Esdras, ‘thoa art true’ (Ganon) it 
was God’s faithfulness in keeping the word of His promise 
secured the preservation of a remnant: see Isa. x. rowies oi 
&c., and Neh. ix. 33. ‘" 

guiltiness: the Hebrew and English words denote. 
bility to punishment.’ pa 
for none, &c.: render, ‘for it is impossible on account of 
this thing to stand before thee.’ 
stand: see Ezek. xxii. 14; Ps. Ixxvis 7, Ixxx. 33 Dan. x17. 
(because of) this: Heb. neut. ‘this thing’: i.e, the | 


question. Pee oxy 
















<4 Kee Cr I Esd. Viii-ix, 36). 


PENTANCE OF THE PEopLe on Account oF THE Mixep Mar- 
-RIAGES AND THE STEPS THEY TOOK TO PUT AN END TO THE 
Evi. 


DO? In the preceding chapter Ezra is the speaker, and the first 
person (I, &c.) is accordingly used. In the present chapter, on 
the contrary, he is spoken of in the third person (he, &c.). The 
ference is generally accounted for by supposing that in chap. x 
’s own words: have been worked over and altered by an 
itor. See p. 16 fi. * p2 





Ses, (and the children they had borne them ?). 

a To most readers it will appear cruelly immoral and irreligious 
‘to require the abandonment of wives that were not of Jewish 
“descent and of the children begotten by them: see, however, on — 
ver. 44, which favours the idea that in most cases the children 
Were not put away. How different Paul’s teaching respecting Ares 
‘mixed marriages (1 Cor. vii. ro ff)! But one has to bear inmind “ 
the peculiar circumstances and the dominating ideas of the day. : 

€ ancients did not attach to marriage the sanctity and binding - 
force with which Christian nations have invested it, so that the 
‘separation of married persong,was much easierand more frequent ~ 
"(See Matt. v. 32, xix. 9). 

Purity of racial blood was always, and especially at the time in ( 
estion, a matter of supreme moment. The nation was believed, as ea 
ch, to have been selected to be the world’s teacher. For this 16 
2 to keep itself apart from other nations. The idea ofnational and 
e remonial purity was now particularly deep in the national con-~ 
ousness, owing in large part to the teaching of the Deuterono- os 
mist and Ezekiel. To the priests of these times there was no es 
middle way between purity and impurity : compromise was im- 
possible. It must, however, be remembered that there was an Pe 
inti-puritan as well as a puritan party, and of this the Book of ~ 

th is one exponent. See Bertholet, Die Stellung, &c. 


















‘made confession: the Hebrew verb so translated means to - “ 

give thanks, praise, and (as here and in Neh. i. 6 and ix. 2f.) to % 

make acknowledgement of sin.. Ezra made confession.on behalfof ~ —- 
he people's sin, because, being one of them, he shared, their guilt 
cording to the old idea of national solidarity : see p. 137,and on ~ 
i. 6 (Century Bible). ¥ 
casting himself down, &c.: stretching hands towards the 
le, the supposed abode of Deity : see 1 Kings viii. 29 f., 35 
‘Dan. vi. 10 and on Ps. exxi. 1 (Century Bible). This would be 
_the priests’ court, on the eastern side of the pice, perhaps in 


a 


’ the great court could see and hear him. 


- often in Ezra-Nehemialh the Jay portion. 


.-2 Chron, xx. 13; Neh. viii. 3, x. 28. 


- with them were harlots, not wives: see last note sara pe r pe 


“on ver, 2 (marry). The ordinary word for putting away a 


























mere was Si, together Bo Kin ea of Ii 
_ great congregation of men and women we child 
the people wept very sore. And Shecaniah, the son 
Jehiel, one of the sons of Elam, answered and said 
Ezra, We have trespassed against our God, and 
married strange women of the peoples. of the land: 
now there is hope for Israel concerning this thing. ~ 
therefore let us make a covenant with our God, to 


front of the altar of burnt offerings. The people assembl 
Israel: thé whole community, not as in ix, 1 Gee orf), and 


congregation: sce on ii. 64. The Hebrew denotes in ‘par. 
ticular a gathering for worship. ! 
men, women, and children: see Deut. xxix, 11, xxi, 3 


women: i.e. the Jewish wives whose sympathies ee 
sure to side with Ezra’s crusade. 

children : not the word used fer infants (taph, see Esthe 
13 and viii.11). The noun used in 1 Esdras (meamias) is ap 
Saul in Acts vii. 58. Josephus uses it of Agrippa. lat the age ee 

2. Shecaniah : ‘see viii. 3 and cf. ver. Did he take 
against his own father? 

sons of Elam: see ii. 7, viii. 7: a 

tréspassed: the Hebrew verb (sma‘al) is used of viola ig 
express command: sce verses 6, 10; Neh. i. 8, xiii, Se 
cognate noun occurs in ix. 2, 4, which see for what i is ten! ne 
see on ver. 13 (transgressed). 

married: lit. ‘to give a home to,” an idiom= to in 
found only in Ezra-Nehemiah, perhaps with the implication 
the union in question was not true marriage : see the next no Se 

strange (women) : this adjective is used in’ Proverbs (ii. 16, 
vii. 5, &c.) to describe a harlot ; the women whom they had living © 


land: see on iii. 3. hy 
3. covenant: the only occurrence’of the words in Ezra. Here i 
denotes a vow or solemn undertaking made to -_ pti oe 







xxix. 6. “ : 
Usually God is said to make a covenant with er as in Ezek. 
XXiv. 35. % 


put aways lit. ‘to put out,’ as in ver..19, i. €. to remove f 
the houses the ‘strange women” whom they had introduced be 










ay all th the wives, rand enchh as are born of them, accord- _ 
ing to the counsel of * my lord, and of those that tremble 
_at the commandment of our God ; and let it be done ac- 


mto thee, and we are with thee: be of good-courage, 
“priests, the Levites, and all Israel, to swear that they 


® Or, the Lord 


bs 
md A 
B occurs in Deut. xxii. 19, &c.; cf. Gen, xxi. to for another such 
_ verb. The union, not being a true marriage, could be brought to 
_ an end by merely turning the woman out : no divorce proceedings 
“were necessary. 

2 all the wives: read (with Zwc. and virtually 1 Esdras) ‘all 
‘our foreign wives.’ 

according to the counsel of my lord (= Ezra): Ezra seems 
~ to have been entrusted by the Persian king with supreme authority 
in Jewish matters. See vii. 5. 
_ those that tremble, &c.: see on ix. 4. In 1 Esdras ‘ Those 


















_ original Hebrew text. 
_-___ let it be done, &c. : render according to the M.T. (so Lue.), 
‘it shall (or will) be done,’ a mere statement of fact. 


yourself,’ ‘be energetic.’ Before another verb it denotes to sét 
“about, begin the action of the verb. See Joshua i..2; Judges iv. 
_ 14; 1 Chron. xxii. 6. » 

-___t Esdras has ‘ Arise and put into execution,’ which may well - 


- from the Hebrew. ii 

& belongeth, &c.: Heb. ‘rests upon thee as an , obligation.’ 
| be of good courage, &c.: lit. “be strong,’ &c. So 1 Chron. 
xxii. 16; cf, Joshua r. 6. 2 
= 5. arose : see on ver. 4 (arise). 

a chiefs: the word belongs to each of the three’. classes 
_ enumerated (priests, Levites, and the laity) : see on’ix. 1. 
___the priests, the Levites: the regular Deuteronomic phrase 
(all Levites were priests, see Deut. xvii. 9-18, xviii. 1, xxi. 5, - 
.), indicating, if genuine, early authorship. But we should 
abably read with Luc., LXX, and 1 Esdras ‘the priests and the 
vites,’ the later (P) phraseology. 

Zsrael: here the laity: see on ver. 1 and ix. 1. 


Eszra’s grief. 


ind do it. Then arose Ezra, and made the chiefs of the 5 


_ would do-according to this word. So they sware. Then 6 


_ 4. Arise: the Heb. verb denotes here, as very often, ‘rouse 


be a mere interpretation, or perhaps a second verb has fallen out ; 





cording to the law. Arise; for the matter belongeth 4 


~ 


‘who obey the law of the Lord,’ which Guthe thinks represents the _ 





water: for he mourned because of the trespass of them > 
~7 of the captivity. And they made proclamation through: 
* According to some ancient versions, and he lodged there. 


ese 
Then Ezra rose, &c.: render, ‘And when Ezra had risen ~ 
from before the house of God he went into the chamber of jae 
hanan, the son of Eliashib, and passed the night there, eating Lai 
bread and drinking no water, &e. 
chamber (Heb. lishkah) : better ‘ cell,’ see on viii, a9. Bt 
Jehohanan the son of Eliashib: since Eliashib was 
priest during the whole or greater part of the activity of Ni 
. miah (see Neh. iii. 1, 20, xiii. 4, 28) this Jehohanan cannot be 
identical with Johanan, the father and predecessor of Jaddua (see 
Neh. xii. 22, cf. ver. 11), the high-priest who, according to 
Josephus 1, went to meet Alexander the Great as the latter was 
advancing towards Jerusalem. Assuming that Jaddua was high- 
priest in 333 B. c. his father could not have held the office at the © 
time with which we are dealing (circa 440 B. c.). Now in the 
Sachau Aramaic Papyri, No. 1, line 18, mention is made of a Jeho- 
hanan, high-priest at Jerusalem at the time this letter was sent to 
Bagoas, governor of Judah, viz. 407 8.c. Eliashib must have hada 
son with this name, and as he was himself high-priest about 440 B. c. 
this son might well have been high-priest in 4078.c. In favour of 
this is the identity of the names—Jehohanan in both cases, while in 
Neh. xii. 22 it is Johanan. Both are Hebrew forms of our ‘ John.’ 
~ It is quite evident, as Néldeke and others have pointed out, 
that the list of high-priests in Neh. xii is defective, see notes on 
the-chapter. There is no need therefore to interpret the words 
‘ the chamber of Jehohanan, son of Eliashib,’ proleptically as mean- 
ing ‘the chamber subsequently known as that of Jehohanan,’ &e. 
and when he came thither (Heb. ‘there’): read. (with 
1 Esdras), ‘and passed the night there,’ changing one Hebrew 
consonant (#) to one much like it (#). In the M.T. two identical 
verbal forms occur in the same verse, which is suspicious. 
he did eat no bread, nor drink water: for fasting as an 
expression of mourning see on viii. 21. 
trespass: see on ver. 2, and for the whole clause on ix. 4. 


7f. An assembly summoned. 
7. made proclamation: see on i. 1, and cf. Neh, viii. 15. See 
also on viii. 2, where a different verb i is employed. 


~ ~~ oa 
a oe 
> Se ee 
: oi nets 
. a Z 


ee See en ae 





1 Antig. x. 8, 5. 







Sip BOE 47 
3 < t Judah and Wareiien unto all the chides of the 
x "captivity, that they should gather themselves together 
unto Jerusalem ; and that whosoever came not within 8 
_ three days, according to the counsel of the princes and the 

elders, all his substance should be ? forfeited, and himself 
_ separated from the congregation of the captivity. Then 9 
» all the men of Judah and Benjamin gathered themselves 
together unto Jerusalem within the three days ; it was the 

" Heb. devoted. 


Judah and Jerusalem : see on ii. I. 
_ ‘8. within three days: since inso short a time the proclamation 
- could be made and responded to, the area within which the community 
_ resided must have been very restricted. See plan opposite p. 159. 
princes : see on ix. I. 
elders: in Ezra an Aramaic (v. 5, &c.) and (as here) a 
_ Heb. word are so rendered. Every city (but see below) had its 
_ elders (see ver. 14), who were heads of houses, and controlled 
local affairs as British town or city councillors. Princes were the 
heads of the three classes of Jewish society, see on ix. 1. It is 
strange, but significant, that we do not read of elders at Jeru- 
salem: probably the princes, residing for the most part at 
Jerusalem, acted as the local as well as the general authority. 
- We do not meet with the words prince or elder in Nehemiah, 
though corresponding words are made use of. See on Neh. ii. 
_ 16, and cf. G.A. Smith, Jerusalem, ii. 377. 
all his substance : : in earlier times idolatrous has were 
bf be devoted (Heb. khevem, Gk. anathema, see Gal. i. 8f.), 
_ i.e. offered up, to-God as a burnt offering: see Joshua vi. 17f., 
Vii. I, 11, 15, &c.(JE). In the later laws individual Israelites 
_ took the place of Canaanite, &c., cities, and were put to death for 
idolatry (Deut. vii. 26; Lev. xxvii. 29 (P)), or excluded from the” 
_ community (John ix. 22, xii. 44, xiv. 2; cf. Luke vi. 22), their 
property being seized (made kherem, a devoted thing) and added 
_ to the wealth of the Temple (see Lev. xxvil, 28f.). The fact that 
_ Ezra had the power to make and enforce such laws shows he had 
. _ been entrusted by the Persians with supreme authority in Jewish 
matters (see vii. 25f.). Among the Israelites property once pos- 
Beeesced would not be permanently at except in very extreme 
‘cases like the above. 
“i 9-17. Meeting of the assembly ; licision to appoint a commission 
eae, Mest 
9. Judah and Benjamin: see on i. 5- 
__‘Rinth month : i. ¢, Kislew (see Zech. vii. x and on Neh, i. 1), 


L2- 







Io 






ninth month, on the twentieth wae nonth : 
the people sat in the broad place before the house 
God, trembling because of this matter, and for * the neat. 
rain. And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto : 
them, Ye have trespassed, and have married strange — : 
women, to increase the guilt of Israel. Now therefore — 
bmake confession unto the Lorp, the God of your 
fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves 
® Heb. the rains. > Or, give thanks ve } 


A 





corresponding roughly to portions of Nov.-Dec., the time of 
the early rain, The 20th Kislew would be nearly five months 
after Ezra’s first arrival (see vii. 9). Perhaps this time was — 
required to make arrangements for the meeting of the commis- ~ 
sion: not at all unlikely there was opposition, internal (see — 
ver. 15) or external. The time of the year was unfavourable for ~ 
such gatherings, but Ezra’s zeal could brook no delay. SS 

the broad place: see on Neh. iii. 26 (water gate). The 
Hebrew word has a sense similar to our ‘square’ or ‘place,’ and ~ 
stands commonly for the open space outside the gates of Eastern — 
cities, used as a market-place (see Deut. xiii. 16; 2 Sam. xxi. 12, 
and Esther iv. 6). This open space was situate on the inside of the. 
Water Gate in the north-east of the temple area. 

great rain: a correct rendering of the Heb. ‘rains’ (‘plural | 
of intensity’). The reference is to the early and heavy rams. 
During my visit to Palestine in 1888 they began on Nov. 4, the 
second day after my arrival at Jerusalem. In the course of the 
following two months there were often for days together lo 
rains than I have seen elsewhere. 

10. (Ezra) the priest: see on vii. 11. 

stood up: see on ver. 4 (arise). : 

trespassed, married, strange women: see on ver.2. 

to increase: better ‘increasing’ (gerund). The ee 
permits either rendering. 

guilt: liability to punishment: see on ix. 4. c 

11. make confession : or ‘give thanks,’ ‘ render praise’ : see " 
PP. 137, 143. 

(do his) pleasure: objectively understood ‘ what He deste 
is pleased with’: see Ps. cxlv. 19 and cf. Neh. ix. 24 (end of | 
verse), Dan. xi. 3, 16, 36. ¢ 

~separate yourselves: see on vi. 21. They were to isolate 
themselves from their heathen neighbours by avoiding unneces-~ 
sary intercourse, observing the laws anent foods and drinks, Bees 
and they were also to put away their heathen wives, Lares 























Pains se 


from. the peoples of the land, and from the strange” 

“women. Then all the congregation answered and said 12 

3 With a loud voice, * As thou hast said concerning us, so 

- must we do. But the people are many, and it is a time of 13 
“much rain, and we are not able to stand without, neither 

~ is this a work of one day or two: for we have greatly 

_ transgressed in this matter. Let now our princes » be ap- #4 
pointed for all the congregation, and let all them that are 

in our cities which have married strange women come at 


* Or, As thou hast said, so it behovetl us to do ® Heb. stand. 






: 
4 
‘ 





i: “peoples of the land: see on iii. 3. 
. 12. congregation : see on ii. 64. Here the word includes the 
__ returned exiles only (see ver. 16), 
bss As thou hast said, &c.: render as in the R.Vm., ‘As thou” 
_ hast said, so it behoveth us to do.’ The E.VV. translate the same 
Hebrew word (‘concerning us, so must we do’) twice over. The 
misplacing of the Hebrew accent has led to this confusion. 
i3. Three hindrances to the expeditious settlement of the 
_ matter are urged. 
‘ rt. The magnitude of the assembly: how could so many find 
_ lodgings and entertainment. 
3 _ 2. The weather was unpropitious. In December, 1888, I saw 
» as much snow in and about Jerusalem, and found it as keenly 
; cold, as during the severest winter in Great Britain. The early 
_ rains are generally accompanied by a sudden depression in 
_ the temperature. 
: - 4, The large number of mixed marriages to be dealt with. 
‘ transgressed: the root idea of the Hebrew verb_( pasha’) is 
* *to rebel’ ; in late Hebrew, as here, it is specially used of violating 
_ aspecific law: see Deut. viii. 23. See on ver. 2 (trespassed). 
' 14. princes: see on ix. 1. They are here to act with the 
- elders and judges. 
for (all the congregation) : ‘on behalf of,’ not ‘ instead of.’ 
cities: i.e. other than Jerusalem. Cases would be tried 
_where the suspected parties resided (cf. our system of legal pro- 
_ cedure and travelling judges). The princes resided at Jerusalem 
d would act in that city: see on ver. 8. The Hebrew word for 
“cities (‘arim) is used for villages, towns, and what we call cities 
(See the concordances), though in some passages it denotes the 
_ idea of a fortified place (2 Kings xvii. 9, xviii. 8, &c.), and even 
a fortress (see 2 Sam. v. 7, 9, vi. 10, &C.)s 
. strange women: see on ver. 2. 


~ 





- 
bali 
> 






150 * EZRA 10. Yoo 


and the judges theneaf, until the fierce wrath a our 
15 be turned from us, ® until this matter be despatched. Only — 
Jonathan the son of Asahel and Jahzeiah the son of Tike 
yah >stood up against this after: and Meshullam and ~ 


® Or, as touching this matter © Or, were appointed over ati ~ 





— 


at appointed times: so Neh, x. 34, xiii. 31. ad 

judges: in earlier parts of the O. T. the king is a: by 
the Hebrew word Englished ‘ judge’: see Deut. xvii. 
2 Kings xvi. 5; Isa. xvi. 5. The shophets (E.VV. yadger | of 
Israel prior to the establishment of the monarchy were deliverers, 
and in their seyeral districts administrators, as, e.g. Gideon 
(Judges vi. 11 ff.), Jephthah (Judges x. 6 ff.), and Samson (Judges 
xili. 1 ff.), though the last named belongs to a different category. ~ 

It is difficult to differentiate ‘ elders’ and ‘judges’ in post-exilic 
biblicalliterature. It seems highly probable that the presiding elder ~ 
in each city (see on cities) was recognized as shophet or judge. 
We find even the priests arrogating to themselves the functions — 
and prerogatives of the judge (see Deut. xvii. 9, xix. 17, xxi. 5), 
just as in later times the high-priest became king (see vii. 5). 

The leading officials in Tyre and Carthage were called shophetim 
(‘judges’ is a very misleading rendering), The two su/éetes 
(= shophetim) in Carthage corresponded to the two consuls in” 
Republican Rome. 

until the fierce, &c. : render, ‘so that the fierce wrath of our 
God may be turned,’ &c. The Hebrew conjunction rendered until 
_has this (fe/ic) meaning also in Gen. xxvii. 44 and Mic. vii. 9. 
until this matter, &c. : read (with 2 Heb. MSS.., the Versions, 
and 1 Esdras) as in R. Vm., ‘as touching this matter.’ 

15. The only prominent men to oppose the policy outlined in” 
ver. 14 were Jonathan and Jahzeiah, aided by Meshullam and ~ 
a Levite called Shabbethai. This is implied in the rendering of — 
_thée R. V., which is the only possible one; but it has difficulties, 
and many scholars prefer, on account of them, to followthe A.V. 

- andthe R. Vm., which regard the four men named as helpers, not 
hinderers, of the proposal described in the foregoing verse. Here 
ate some of the grounds for the latter view :— 

1. The verb here rendered in the R. V., stood up against, is 
identical with that rendered in ver. 14, the appointed for.’ In 
reply, let it be noted that the preposition following the verb is 
different in each case, and that there are many examples in Hebrew 
in which a verb has opposite meanings with different prepositions. 
Cf. the Hebrew verbs ‘ to be sorry,’ &c., and ‘to fight.’ Loos 

As a matter of fact this verb (lit. ‘to stand’) means | - stand 


saws 


_— ——- 


le te, 





- 





“Shabbethai the Levite helped them. And the children 
' Of the captivity did so. And Ezra the priest, w7th cer- 
’ tain heads of fathers’ Zowses, after their fathers’ houses, and 

all of them by their names, were separated ; and they sat 








against’ in Lev. xix. 16; 1 Chron. xxi. 1; 2 Chron. xxii. 23; 
~ Dan. viii. 25, xi. 15. Perhaps the writer intends a word-play in 
’ verses 14 f, (‘stand for,’ ‘stand against’). 

2. The beginning of ver. 16 is said to imply that the returned 
exiles supported the suggestion of ver. 14. But if the text is not 
at fault (which is doubtful) we may understand the word ‘so’ in 
ver. 16 to refer to what is said in ver. 14, ver. 15 being treated as 

’ a parenthesis. We may then thus paraphrase ver. 16: ‘But the 


returned exiles acted thus (see ver. 14) (though Jonathan, &c., 


stood up against it).’ 

3. We do not read elsewhere of any opposition. It should, 
however, be remembered that our narrative is but a brief and 
imperfect record of what took place, and, to say the least, oppo- 
sition of the kind here advocated is exactly what one would 
- have expected. 

It may be added :— ; 

zi. The word rendered only has often the meaning of ‘ but,’ 

‘however,’ introducing an adversative sentence : see Gen. ix. 4, xx. 
‘2, xxi. 21; Lev. xxi. 23, xxvii. 28; Num. xviii. 15, 17; 2 Sam. 
ean. 13; Jer. x. 24. 








_ of the proposal of ver. 14, and not Jonathan, &c. It must, how- 
“ever, be allowed that the Versions, including 1 Esdras, favour 
the A. V. and R, Vm. 
3. Van Hoonacker! thinks Jonathan (see viii. 6) and Jahzeiah 


 Levites. This is, however, a case of being wise above what 
is written. 

"16. See on preceding verse. 

children of the captivity : see on iv. 1 and also on ii, 1. 

: And Ezra, &c, : render, ‘And Ezra chose (lit. ‘ separated ’) for 
himself a number (lit. ‘men’) of heads of fathers’ houses according” 
' to their fathers’ houses, all of them marked (ticked) off by name,’ 
heads of fathers’ houses: see on ii. 59. 

by their names: probably the phrase at the end of viii. 20 
a on) stood originally here as there, the participle ‘ marked * 
(R. V. ‘ expressed *) having been overlooked by an early copyist. 
— _were separated: read with 1 Esdras and some MSS. of the 
LXX, ‘(And Ezra) chose (lit. ‘separated ’) for himself’: see above. 









! Nehémie et Esdras, p. 38 (n.). 


eS URZRA 1016. . ee eg ieee 


THY, 


2. We know that it was Ezra who superintended the execution _ 


~-(mowhere else mentioned) were priests and their two helpers ~ 


152 EZRA 10. 17, 18 























* 


down in the first day of the tenth month to e 
17 matter. And they made an end with all the men that 
married strange women by the first day of the first m on t 
18 And among the sons of the priests there were found thi 





tenth month: i. e. Tebet (Dec. -Jan. ) : see on ver. 9. 

a to examine, &c.: another instance of the tacit use 
the English translators (EVV.) of an amended text. The M 
has (apparently) ‘for Darius,’ the consonants of which are alm 
exactly the same as ‘to cxamine.’ st 

17. The M.T. is incapable of yielding any passable sen: 
Bertheau and succeeding commentators are almost cert 
right in regarding the words the men that had married 
wives as the heading which originally preceded the lists 
verses 18-44. Ver. 17 will then contain excellent Hebrew, tes 
translation of which is: ‘And (the inquiry) was brought to 
end in every place by the first day,’ &c, If the M.T. is retair "y 
We must render: ‘And (the inquiry) was brought to an end a - 

‘regards all the men who had married strange women by the firs - 
day,’ &c. tig tl 

And they made an end: the construction is that of 
indefinite subject and is better translated by the passive. It is ' 
thing done that is emphasized, not the agent or agents. ae rs 
married strange women: See on ver. 2. : 
first month: i.e. Nisan (March-April): the Jewish year 
began with Nisan after the exile down to the time of Alexander 
the Great, .Originally, however, Tishri (Sept. -Oct.) was the 
month (see Exod. xxiii, JE; xxxiv, J). Josephus and the Mishn 
make a distinction between a sacred and a secular year, beaiaaingy : 
respectively with Nisan and Tishri, This is, however, a distine- s 
tion about which the scriptures know nothing, though in the 
P laws as to feasts, &c., Nisan opens the year: see J us, 
Antig. i. 3, 3, and Schiirer, Geschichte), &c., i. gaff. (E. id a 
38 fi.). 
~The commissioners had spent three months (ef. verses 16 f.) ‘ine 
the work of trying the cases, That the evil was not entirely — 
removed is proved by Neh. xiii. 23, 26-28; cf. Neh. ix. 2. oa 

18-44. Lists of ‘ the men who had ‘areca strange women’ : see — 
on ver. 17. This list must have been carefully preserved in 
city or temple archives. Even the fertile brain of the Chronicler — 
could hardly have invented these names and what is said in 
connexion with them. 4 

The-grouping of the persons involved follews che that of ‘ 
the lists in ch. ii (see introductory remarks to) and in 

I, Temple officers : 

1. Priests, seventeen in number; 18-22, 









d married strarige women: zamely, of the sons of ~ 
ua, the son of Jozadak, and his brethren, Maaseiah, 
























r hand that they would put away their wives ; and 

g guilty, they offered a ram of the flock for their 

t. And of the sons of Immer; Hanani and 20 — 
badiah. And of the sons of Harim; Maaseiah, and at 
ijah, and Shemaiah, and Jehiel, and Uzziah. And of 22 
Ee e sons of Pashhur; Elioenai, Maaseiah, Ishmael, 

‘N ethanel, Jozabad, ahd Elasah. And of the Levites ; 23 

| Jozabad, and Shimei, and Kelaiah (the same is Kelita), 
| Pethahiah, Judah, and Eliezer. And of the singers;24 _ 
‘Eliashib : and of the porters ; Shallum, and Telem, and 





_ 2, Levites, six in number : 23. ee 
Be 3. Singers(2, see on ver. 24) and porters (3), five in number: 24. 
: I. The laity (Israel), eighty-six in number: 25-43. We do 
‘read here of Nethinim (see p. 63 f.) or of Solomon’s servants 


= 


married strange women: see on ver. 2. s 
_Jeshua: see on ii. 2. ; 
19. they gave their hand: i.e. they entered into a compact: <— 
"see 2 Kings x. 15; 2 Chron, xxx. 8; Lam. v.6; Ezek. xvii.t7, 
| _ put away: see on ver. 3. z 
and being gnilty ...a ram: read (with Kuenen and 
' most later scholars), ‘and their guilt offering wasaram.’ Nochange 
in the consonantal, the only original part of the text, is required, 

The M.T. makes poor Hebrew and (omitting the italicized words 

erted by the translators) poorer English. 

_ For guilt offering see Lev. v. 14 ff. 

_ ram of the flock: in Lev. v. 18 ‘ ram.’ 

_ (for their) guilt : see on ix. 6. 2 

: 22. Priests: see on ii. 36-39. : - ms 

. Levites. 

” Kelaiah (Kelita): see Neh. viii. 7, x. 10. 


s distinct from the Levites. . See p. 61 f. 
Seeebib : add (with Luc, and 1 Esdras) ‘and Zaccur.’ 




























. 
4 


154 ee EZRA 10, 25-38 


25 Uri. And of Israel: of the sone ‘Gt Ps 
and Izziah, and Malchijah, and Mijathin, aaa 
26 and Malchijah, and Benaiah. And of the sons of Ela 
_-Mattaniah, Zechariah, and Jehiel, and Abdi, and J 
27 moth, and Elijah. And of the sons of Zattu; Elioen: 
Eliashib, Mattaniah, and Jeremoth, and Zabad, ai 
28 Aziza. And of the sons of Bebai; Jehohanan, Hana-~ 
29 niah, Zabbai, Athlai. And of the sons of Bani; Mesh 
ullam, Malluch, and Adaiah, Jashub,and Sheal, *Jeremoth. 
30 And of the sons of Pahath-moab; Adna, and Chelal,” 
Benaiah, Maaseiah, Mattaniah, eaienaar': and Binnui, a J 


32 Malchijah, Shemaiah, Shimeon ; Tekan Malluch, - ‘ 


> ® Another reading is, and Ramoth. 
a 

25-43. Laymen. The houses mentioned here occur also in 
ch. ii. 3 ff. (see on), though in a different order. © 

25. Israel: i.e. the lay portion of the nation, as in ix. I 2 
Neh. xi. 3 ; see (for the wider sense) x. 1. The name stood 1 
the Northern Kingdom until that kingdom came to aclose (1 Kix 
xxiv. 7, 10), after which it was used for the Southern Coe . 
50; Jer. ii. 12, 31, &c.), and even for the new Jewish comm 
made up almost entirely of returned exiles (x. i). > ; 

Malchijah: read (with Luc.) ‘ Michaiah.’ 

26. Jehiel: see on ver. 2. ; 

28. Zabbai: in ii. 9 ‘ Zaccai.’ In Hebrew the letters 6 and 
c (Rk) are almost identical, and are therefore constantly confounded. 
by the ancient translators. 

29. Bani: a house or clan of the same name is mentioned in 
ver. 34, copyist's mistake. Perhaps (as Keil, S&c., suggest) we 4 
should in one of these places read Bigwai (Bigvai) (ii. mie 
Moreover, whereas the number of offenders belonging to 
other houses vary from four to eight, of the house of the second” 
Bani (ver. 34) twenty-seven are mentioned. Probably the text ~ 
has suffered corruption, several heads of houses having stood — 
originally in the section beginning with ver. 24. Schultz holds’ 
that the twenty-seven men of verses 34-41 belonged to cin 
country districts of Judah. 

Jeremoth: to be preferred to gr. and R.Vm. ‘and Ramoth.?, 

31. (And) of: remove the italics and (with LXX, 1 Me 
many Hebrew MSS.) restore the corresponding Hebrew v 
(min). 


“BZRA 10. 33-44. ~ = 155 





Shemariah. Of the sons of Hashum ; Mattenai, Mattat= 33 
ah, Zabad, Eliphelet, Jeremai, ee Shimei. Of 34 
ihe sons of Bani; Maadai, Amram, and Vel; Benaiah, 35 
‘Bedeiah, 4Cheluhi ; Vaniah, Meremoth, Eliashib ; Matta- 36, 37 
‘niah, Mattenai, and Bieasu; and Bani, and Binnui, Shimei; 38 
and Shelemiah, and Nathan, and ade. Machnadebai, 39, 4¢ 
Shashai, Sharai; Azarel, and Shelemiah, Shemariah 5 41 
Shallum, Amariah, Joseph. Of the sons of Nebo ; Jeiel, 42, 43° 
‘Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, ¢Iddo, and Joel, ioanie 
“All these had taken strange wives: and “some of them 44 
had wives by whom they had children. 


q 
> *® Another reading is, Cheluhu. 

_ © Another reading is, Jaasai. © Another reading is, Jaddai. 
_ * Or, some of the wives had borne children 


ve "34. Uel: read (with Luc, and i Esdras) ‘ Joel.’ 

88. and Bani, and Binnui: read (with LXX, 1 Esdras), ‘and of 
the sons of Binnui.’ The difference in the Hebrew is slight. 

| 44. had taken: cf. the Heb. verb rendered ‘ married’ in ver. 2 
(See on). 

: strange wives: Hebrew, as in ver. 2 (see on), ‘ strange 

“women.” 

"and some of them, &c.: the M.T. is hopelessly corrupt, and 

it stands,means nothing. There is, in the Commentary of Ber- 

‘theau-Ryssel a statement of many attempts at restoration, not 
one of them being plausible. It is better to follow the text im- 
lied in 1 Esd. ix, 36, reading ‘and they put them away with 

‘their children.’ 


: Ezra’s SUBSEQUENT History. 


’ In Neh. i. t we pass on at once to the history of Nehemiah, 
the account of Ezra’s activity suddenly coming to anend. Then 
the thread of Eara's narrative is resumed in a quite unexpected 
“way at Neh. vii. 73°, in a context which tells of Nehemiah’s life 
4 work, Ezra’s name not occurring once. This isolated section 
eh. vii. 73 b_x) relates to Ezra and his doings, Nehemiah’s name 
coming quite casually in at two places (Neh. viii. 9 and x. 22, see ~ 
on), and then almost certainly through a copyist’s mistake or as 
‘an editor’s gloss. The contents of this Ezra section in a Nehe- 
‘miah context may be thus laid out :— 
i, The public reading of the law (vii. 73°-viii. 12). After the 





ie: thee , oe 





























publicly the law be which the Cesc s lives were to be 
_-2. Observance of the Feast of Tabernacles (viii. 13-18) 

3. Repentance and prayer of the people on finding tha’ 
conduct came so far short of the law now read (ix). 

4. The people make a covenant to observe the law (x). 
~_ That the section thus analysed originally followed Ezra x, 
belongs strictly to Ezra’s biography, not Nehemiah’s, appear, 
several considerations. 

1. This agrees with the order of events in 1 Esdras, where 
reading of the law (1 Esd. ix. 37-55, ef. Neh. vii. 73° viii, 12) | 
follows the expulsion of the strange women (1 Esd. viii. ome 
36, cf. Ezra ix f.). 

2. The sequence of events in Josephus (Anfig, xi. 5) is identi 
with that of 1 Esdras, though too much weight should not be put” 
on this, as throughout Josephus follows the apochryphal r Esd 
rather than the canonical Ezra, > 

3. In the section under consideration (Neh. vii. 73° ff.) Ezra 
suddenly steps forward, becoming the chief agent, and as sudden} 
disappears. Omitting ‘this part of Nehemiah the rest of the bode 
is continuous and homogeneous. oan 

4. Inthe corresponding portion of 1 Esdras and Josephus. rH 
mention is made of Nehemiah, which is in favour of omitting be 
name from Neh. viii. 9 and x. 22, Bay? 

5. In this section Nehemiah comes before us as (ce Tintaea 
(vili. 9, x. x), an epithet used besides only of Sheshbazzar (vii. ( 
73; Ezra ii. 63), whereasin the undisputed Nehemiah memoirs 
is called pekhah or governor (Neh. v. 14 f., 18). 

6. We read in viii. 13 of ‘heads of fathers’ houses’ as often in 
Ezra (see p. 52f.). In Nehemiah the technical terms are quite 
different (see ii. 16, iv. 8, 13, V- 7, 17, vil..7, xi1..40, xiil. 11); J 

q- Many turns of expressions frequent in Nehemiah are absent 
from these chapters, e. g, ‘ According to the good hand of my God 
upon me’ (ii, 8, 18), ‘God put into my heart’ (ii. 12 and vii. 5). 
Moreover Nehemiah speaks of himself in the first person. In” 
Neh. viii. 9, x. i he is spoken of in the third person—though the 
name has to be rejected in both cases. See on the verses. 

8. Removing the section in question, Neh. vii. 73° and xi. 1 (See 
on the latter) join well together, whereas there does not seem to 
be any connexion between Neh. x and xi, Most of the a 
points were noticed and the same conclusions drawn by j.0 
Michaelis in his annotated translation into German of the Hebi 
Bible (1769-83, 13 vols.). ere 

Such is the view accepted by virtually all modern scholz 
though Keil vigorously defends the historical continuity of 
chapters (see Com., Introd.), holding with Bertheau ae his 
Ryssel), Schultz, &c., that during the events here rele TE 






5 “EZRA fo eee oe Aes - 


present fi. Jerusalem, though Ezra oceupied now the chistes 
ace, as the work (reading the law, _&c.) was much more on the 
lines of his activity. 

' From the fact that Nehemiah’s name occurs twice it has been 
“commonly inferred that the final editor of Ezra-Nehémiah took 
this section to belong to Nehemiah’s own history, but this is 
more than doubtful (see on Neh. vill. 9 andx.1). It is more 
os that the copyist, piecing his skin-leaves (called ‘ doors” 





Jer. xxxvi. 23) to form the parchment roll, mixed the parts, his 
mistake being perpetuated by other copyists who followed. It is 
also in this way probably that we are able to explain the present 
position of Ezra iv. 6-23 (see on), which has nothing to do with 
_ the time of Ezra or the events amid which he moved. 

_ It seems clear that so far as biblical sources go the account of 
a Ezra’s work closes with Ezra x adding Neh. vii. 73°-x. Not- ~ 
_ withstanding all that has been said to the contrary (see Keil, 
_ Bertheau, Ryle, &c.) it cannot be that Ezra and Nehemiah were- 
_ both present at US dctees during the course of the events nar- 
rated in Neh. vii. 73°-x, though it is quite certain that Ezra was, 
3 held the first place. 











Consprcrus OF THE Cuter Events In Ezra’s LIFE 


according to Ezra vii-x and Neh, vii. 73°-x, attaching Ezra.iv. 
a to the records of a later time, perhaps to the events among 





which Nehemiah moved. 

1. Ezra and his party begin the journey from Babylon (vii. 6 f, 
Vill. 15, 31). 
' Date: year, the 7th of Artaxerxes I (458 B.c.); month, 1st; 
day, Tst. 
2. They reach Jerusalem (vii. 8f.). 
Date: year, same; month, 5th; day, ist. : 
3. A three days’ rest, on the 4th day gifts and offerings being 
_ presented for the Temple (viii. 12), 

Date : see under 2 above. 
; 4. Ezra amazed and grieved on finding that many of the Jews 





had married heathen women (ix). 

Date: None given, but this must belong to the days immedi- 
: ately following the arrival. The evil was too palpable and serious 
to escape the vigilant eye and the uncompromising orthodoxy of 
Ezra. 
_ 5. Appointment of a commission to inquire into the matter and 
to report (x. I-16), ; 
Date: year, 7th of Artaxerxes I; month, roth (Tebet); 
day, ist. 
6. The commission meet ; its finding (x. 17-44). 
‘Date: year, 8th (see above, 5); month, tst (Nisan); day, rst. 







he 


158 be fi EZRA | 


q. Departure of the people to their s 
tral homes (Neh. vii. 73°). , 
Date: year, as in 6? (inferred, not stated) ; : qt 
(Tishri) ; day? ne 
8. Public reading of the law at Jerusalem (Neh. viii. 1-re) 
Date: year, 8th of Artaxerxes I (inferred, not stated) ; 
qth (Tishri); day, rst. Ezra reads the law publicly thed 
day on the morning (?) of which the people depart for 
several homes. : 
9. Observance of the Feast of Tabernacles (Neh. viii. 8-18 
Date: year, as in 8, above; month, 7th (Tishri); day, 
to 22nd. ee 
10, The people acknowledge their sin (Neh. ix)and make a vow 
(covenant) to put away the heathen wives (Neh. x). aa 
Date: year, as above in 6-9; month, 7th (Tishri); day, 
(two days after Tabernacles) and (apparently) following days, 
For details as to the several episodes enumerated above se 
the passages with which they are connected. : 


Ezra’s death, We have no authoritative record of Ezra’s 
beyond what is told us in Ezra and Neh. vii. 73”-x, thi 
Josephus * is probably right in saying that he passed away b 
Nehemiah’s first visit to Jerusalem. We have no definite ¢ 
for believing that they ever met, nor does either refer to the otk 
—this is quite in the manner "of Israel’s ancient leaders (e.g. 
Micah and Isaiah, &c.). 

When and where Ezra died we are not reliably informed, th 
Jewish tradition has, with its usual readinessand fertility of resource, ” 
supplied what history lacks. Summing up the work of Ezra” 

' Josephus ? says: ‘After he had obtained this reputation an 
the people he died an old man and was buried in a magnifi 
manner at Jerusalem.’ He is said in the Talmud to have breath 
his last at Zamzagu on the Tigris while on his way from Je 
lem to Susa, whither he was journeying for the purpose oh CO 
ferring with Artaxerxes about Jewish affairs. His monument on 
the bank of the Lower Tigris is still shown and greatly revered by y 
Eastern Jews. 


























Ds Si, 


or 


‘or 3 
, 


 Antig. x. 5. 4 Antig. X- 5+ 5 





— 


PLAN OF JERUSALEM IN THE TIME OF 


| Modern Walla shown thus ——em P 
Aaciant 


Modern Names in brackets (WESTERN HILL) 














OR 
(“Zion”) 


Scale of Half a Mile 
” 


% 

5 NEHEMIAH 

4 GENERAL OUTLINE OF NEHEMIAH (OMITTING Vii. 73>-x). 

: t. Neh. i. 1-vii. 5: Nehemiah’s description in the first person 


_ of the earlier of his two journeys from Persia to Jerusalem. This 
_ narrative, so simple, naive, and homogeneous, has hardly ever been 
Peetioncd. 
= 2. Neh. vii. 6—-73*: List of Jews who returned from Babylon 
: seggin on Ezra ii). 
g. xi-xii. 26 > Several lists. 
4. xii. 27-43: Dedication of the walls of Jerusa2.em. 
"© 5. xii. 44-47: Organization of the Levites. Measures for their 


_. 6, xiii. 1-3: Separation of Israelites from people of mixed 
_ blood. 
7. xiii. 4-9: Nehemiah’s second visit to Jerusalem. Expulsion 
_of Tobiah from the Temple; sanctity of the Jatter maintained. 
8. xiii. to-14.: Measures for the support of the Levites, see 5. 
9. xiii. 15-22: Means employed for securing the observance of 
_ the Sabbath. 
' to. xiii. 23-29: Vigorous protest of Nehemiah against mixed 
_ Matriages. 
+ i. xili. 30 f.: Resumé of Nehemiah’s work. 


t+ 
j Bet oN Ezra AND NEHEMIAH. 
} 


| It is assumed throngucut the present volume that Ezra and 
Nehemiah were never at any time contemporaries at Jerusalem 
' (See p. 157f.). : i 
Between Ezra x, adding Neh. vii. 73°-x and Neh. i..1 there is 
no historical connexion, and a space of some ten years must lie 
between. One may compare the break here with: that between 
Ezra vi and vii, though the gap in the latter is much wider. 
Perhaps portions of FEzra-Nehemiah which dealt with the 
intervening years in both cases have been lost. 

So far as concerns Ezra’s own work it may be legitimate to 
conclude that it came to an end with what is told us in Neh. x 
_ (or viii ?). 

- The evils of mixed marriages had been dealt with and to a large 
M 


= oo 






388 NEHEMIAH 1. +. 


[N] Tue * words of Nehemiah the son 0 
Now it came to pass in the month Chisley, bin 


® Or, history > See ch, ii. 1. 


extent mitigated. Ezra had probably died (say about 457 8. 
for in the history of Nehemiah’s work at Jerusalem (Neh. i-vii, 
he is not mentioned, nor elsewhere after 457 B.c. 3 

In Neh. i. 1 we are all at once transported to 445 B. c, 
year of Nehemiah’s first arrival at Jerusalem. . What happe 
in this interval of some dozen years? For the answer we are 
largely to conjecture. Probably Ezra iv. 6-23 (see on) belo 
here. The Jews seem to have set about the restoration of 
walls of Jerusalem, perhaps before Ezra passed away, and at h 
instigation. But the Samaritan party became once more a soure 
of annoyance and a hindrance to their pious kinsmen, and, m 
sundry charges of disloyalty, &c., against the Jews, induced 
Persian king to issue an edict putting an end for the time to 
work and (probably) imposing fresh burdens and disabilities 
the builders. It is to these latter that Neh. i. 3 seems to allude 

It has been objected that if previous attempts at repairing “ 
wall had been made they would have been mentioned in Neh 
3ff. Moreover (it is added), if earlier prohibitory edicts 
been issued their withdrawal would have been spoken of wh 
Nehemiah is allowed to begin the work. It is forgotten, ho 
that in Ezra~-Nehemiah we have what is evidently but an im 
sketch of the history of the time, a collection of fragments ai 
which it would be perilous to draw @ priori conclusions, 















I. r-11, NeHEmran’s SORROW AND PRAYER, ae 


1-3. Nehemiah receives bad tidings concerning the Jerusalem Jews. 
1. The words of... Hacaliah: the original heading bo 
Nehemiah’s autobiography (i. I-vii. 5). 
words: better ‘acts’ (cf. 1 King xi. 41 ‘the acts” of 
Solomon’) or as (R. Vm.) ‘history.’ But the Hebrew is neutral 
and can in itself bear any one of the above renderings. 4 
Nehemiah: the Heb. = (‘ one whom) Yahiweh comforts; ; et. 
the meaning of Ezra ‘one whom Yahweh helps.” See on Ezra 
vil. tr. We read of two others bearing the name ‘Nehemiah’ 
(see iii. 16 and Ezra ii. 2), 
Hacaliah: read (with Bohme, Cheyne, and Budde), ‘Khak- 
kel*yah’ (‘= trust in Yah’). 
Chislev: Assyr. Kislitvu, the ninth inonth (= our Nov. Dees 
After the return from Babylon the Jews adopted the Babylonian 
(Assyrian) month-names instead of their’ own. See (for both” 
sets of names) Schirer), i. 744 ff. (E.V. I. ii. 763 ff.) and ong 
Ezra x, 17. eee 2S 





of Judah; and I asked them concerning the Jews 


® Or, casile 























" in the twentieth year: these words are a dittograph from 
1, or, more likely, they occur instead of a lower number (roth ?) 
es a copyist passing his eye to the beginning of the 
t chapter. If we retain the M.T. ch. ii is chronologically 

ior to ch. i, as the first month (Nisan, ii. 1) precedes the ninth 
lisley, i. 1). But the contents of these chapters make this 
position impossible, See on ii. r for the king whose reign is_ 


' Shushan = Susa, the capital of ancient Elam, made by 
rus one of the capitals of the Persian kingdom. Other capitals 
e Ecbatana, Persepolis, and Babylon. The king held his 
‘court at each of these, perhaps alternately. They were really 
ormer royal residences of kingdoms once independent. Shushan 
usa), east of the Persian Gulf, is represented by the modern — 
tind of Shush, fifteen miles’ south- west of Dizful in Persia. 
_ palace: R. Vm. ‘ castle,’ Luc. and some MSS. of the LXX baris. 


ed to the fortified portion of Susa here, in Esther, and also in Dan, 


pyri (i. 1) Yeb (Elephantiné) and Syené are so designated. 

‘In Esther ix ‘ Susa the fortress’ is distinguished from Susa the 
proper (verses 13-15). Recent discoveries show that the 
ortified Part of the city was separated from the rest of Susa 
‘by the river Choaspes. See on Esther ii. 5 and note by Driver 


on Dan. viii. 27 (Camb. Bible). 
_ 2. (Hanani, one of my) brethren: render ‘brothers’; a literal 


the Jews... escaped . a captivity: those of the Babylonian 
S who had come to Jerusalem, the remnant of such. No one 


‘under Ezra, who is held to have laboured eee to 
hemiah, see p. 25 ff. 
3 Be reference seems to be to the situation implied in Ezra 








sant. : = 


© Hebrew word seems to denote a fortified place, and hence is ap- ~ 


Chron. xxix. 1 of the Jerusalem Temple, and in the Sachau © 






nani, one of my brethren, came, he and certain men 


_ 













162 NEHEMIAH 1.45. N 


ty 


remnant that are left of the captivity there in the 
vince are in great affliction and reproach: the wall 
Jerusalem also is broken down, and the gates thereof 
4 burned with fire. And. it came to pass, when I heard — 
these words, that I sat down and wept, and mourned cer” 
tain days; and I fasted and prayed before the God of 
5 heaven, and said, I beseech thee, O Lorp, the God 


Kosters} and Marquart? say that it is to the destructi 
Jerusalem in 586 B.c. that this verse refers. But this cannot 
1. The event implied must be something recent or Nehem 
could not have been surprised to hear of it. How could Neh 
in 445 be astonished at hearing of the great ruin of Jerusalem aad 
its Temple 140 years and more ago? 7 

2. Nehemiah would be sure to know of the royal edict stop 
the building of the walls (Ezra vi. 17 ff.), yet he could hardly at'so” 
great a distance have known of the sufferings of the Jews at Be 
or the actual condition of the city. 

g. There seems to be in Neh. vi. 6 an underlying reference to. 
an earlier edict against the building of the walls: ‘It is r Fe 

that thou and the Jews think to rebel’ (against the royal 
edict, &e.). t 

the province: see on Ezra ii. r. ay 

in great affliction, &c. to end: see ii. 3, 17. Sir4 

wall... broken down: to make further defiance impossible ¢ ; 
see 2 Kings xiv. 13. 

4-11. Nehemiah’s grief; his confession and prayer, both the latter 
bearing a strong liturgical character. 

4. With Nehemiah’s manifestations of grief compare those of 
Ezra (Ezra ix. 3-5, x. 6). as 

sat down: see Job ii. 13. soe 
certain (days): better ‘some (= ‘a few’) days.’ 
the God of heaven: see on Ezra Vi. 9. 

5. O LORD: Heb. Yahweh (Jehovah), always i in the EV ed 
written Lorp with small capitals except in- four (R. V._six) 
places, where Jehovah occurs. For some centuries B.c. this sacred 
name was avoided, and instead of it the Hebrew word for } 
(Adonat) substituted as is the custom among modern ey y 
this substituted word which is translated in the L and phe 
versions (not the French). This is, however, the only exa 
of the use in Nehemiah of this Divine name. It is the distinctive 
name for Israel’s God as such. 


F) 


— Se 

op. cit. p- 60. 2 ee ae : 
Berd 

w mf Tee . ‘s af! 3 










































ven, the aot and terrible God, that keepeth cove- 
/mant and mercy with them that love him and keep his 
“commandments: let thine ear now be attentive, and 6 
thine eyes open, that thou mayest hearken unto the 
" ptayer of thy servant, which I pray before thee at this 
| time, day and night, for the children of Israel thy ser- 
yants, while I confess the sins of the children of Israel, 
_ which we have sinned against thee : yea, I and my father’s 
“house have sinned. We have dealt very corruptly against 7 
“thee, and have not kept the commandments, nor the 
_ statutes, nor the judgements, which thou commandedst 


word that thou commandedst thy servant Moses, saying, 
If ye trespass, I will scatter you abroad among the peoples : 


¥ the great and terrible God: see iv. 14, ix. 32; Deut. vii. 21, 
X17; Dan. ix. 4. 
% that keepeth covenant, &c.: see ix. 32; Deut. vii.g; 1 Kings 
"viii. 23, &c. 
. 6. let thine ear now be attentive: sover. 11; 2 Chron. vi. 40; 
Ps. cxxx. 2. The now of this verse is that of entreaty (Heb. na), 
* not the xow of time (Heb. ‘afah). 
thine eyes oper: so 2 Chron. vi. 4o. 
thy servant = ‘me’ with the added feeling of humility. In 
‘respectful address to a superior the word servant is often used to 
~ form personal pronouns. Thus ‘thy servant’ =I or me (Gen. 
> xv 3.0 3 Sam. xx. 7£); ‘thy servants’= we or us. See 
_ Gen, xlii. 11; Num. xxxi. 49. 
day and night: see Acts xx. 31. 
confess ... sins... which we have sinned: see on Ezra x. r. 
_ %. We (have dealt, ke, ): see on Ezra x. 5. 
_ commandments .. . statutes .. . judgements: found 
_ together as summing up the law; also Deut. v. 31, vi, vii: 11, xi. 
For the distinction between the words, see ‘Psalms’ (Century 
Bible), vol. ii, p. 254. 
_. which thou commandedst, &c.: see Deut. vi. 1, &c. 
. Remember ... the word: nothing in the O.T. ‘corresponds 
Eeettly to the language cited; the nearest equivalent is perhaps 
Deut. xxx, 1-5; cf. Deut. iv. 27, xxviii. 64. See in Ezra ix. 12 
@ Similar case). 
_ trespass: see on Ezra x. 2. 
: ak eis. 


“ eat < ‘a. ss Sty : ioe a 3 Si < . 
a, {EMIAH 1. 6-8. N ROR 


“thy servant Moses. Remember, I beseech thee, the 8 


+ 


Io 


‘ee - NEHEMIAH 1. 











part of the heaven, yet will I gather them from thence 
and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen te 
cause my name to dwell there. Now these are thy : ‘: 
vants and thy people, whom thou hast redeemed by thy d 
great power, and by thy strong hand. O Lord, I be 
thee, let now thine ear be attentive to the prayer of thy 
servant, and to the prayer of thy servants, who delight to 
fear thy name: and prosper, I pray thee, thy servant this 


















9. return: the Hebrew means primarily to make a turn, me a 
change the direction; cf. A.V. ‘turn.’ But it comes to mean 
more usually ‘ return.’ 

unto the place, &c.: the phraseology is Deuteronomic, ice 
Deut. xii, 5, &c., and cf. Ezra vi, 12. The place meant is 
course Jerusalem, though it is not mentioned in connexion 
with the phrase, and Prof. A. Duff has ably argued that a 
in the Northern Kingdom is what Deuteronomy origin: 
intended}. 

10. For the phraseology see Deut. vii. 8, ix. 26, 29; and es E 
Exod. iii. 19. eed 

redeemed: the Hebrew word (fadah) is used specially 24 
freeing slaves. For other verbs so rendered see on Ps. Ixxiv. 2 
(Century Bible). 
11. O Lord: in Nehemiah only here and iv. 8; see ver. 5(Lorp). 
thy servant... thy servants: see on ver. 6. Here, as follow- 
ing Lord (not Lorp = Yahweh), very appropriate. 

Note the apparent paradox in delight to fear, but ‘to fear 
God’ is the O.T. expression for to reverence and obey y 
See Ps. ii. 11, xxii. 23. < 

thy name = ‘thee’ (with emphasis). The word name with 
the appropriate pronoun (‘my,’ ‘thy,’ &c.) is constantly = 
in the O,T. of God as an emphatic personal pronoun, ‘ myself,’ 
‘thyself’ In Ps; lv. 6 ‘unto thee’ stands in parallelism to ‘ unt 
thy name.’ This usage arises from the employment of ‘name’ in 
the sense of revealed character, the person as named and thus 
known: see on Ps. Ixxix. 9, lxxxiii. 16, cxxiv. 8 (Century Se 
ef. ‘thy servant’ in ver. 6, &c. 





1 See Old Test. Theology, vol. ii, ‘The Deuteronomic ic Relocatiaaa 
ER te? 








NEHEMIAH 2.1 N 165. 


ay, and grant him mercy in the sight of this man. 
- (Now I was cupbearer to the king.) = 
_ And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth 2 
" year of Artaxerxes the king, when wine was before him, 





' - mercy: in the Old English sense of pity, compassion. The 

_ Hebrew words here = ‘make me’ (lit. ‘ thyself,’ see on ver. 6) ‘to 

_ be an object of compassionate regard in the eyes of this man’ (i.e. 

the King of Persia). 

I. xr°-II (end). NrHEMIAH REQUESTS AND OBTAINS THE K1ne’s 
PERMISSION TO VISIT JERUSALEM FOR THE PURPOSE OF RE- 
|. BUILDING THE WALLS AND RESTORING SociaAL ORDER. 

i. 11°-ii. 8. The king’s favourable response to Nehemiah’s request. 

11. Now I was cupbearer, &c.: these words belong to the 
“next chapter, which it appropriately introduces, 

cupbearer: Heb. Jit. = ‘one who causes’ or ‘ gives to drink? 

"The absence of the definite article (though in the A.V. ‘it is 

inaccurately prefixed ‘the cupbearer’) suggests, what is other- 

wise known to be the case, that the king would have two or more 

_ cupbearers who relieved one another: see 1 Kings x.5; 2 Chron. 

_ ix. 4; Gen. xl. 2 (‘chief of the cupbearers,’ E.VV. wrongly ‘of 
_ the butlers’); 2 Kings xviii. 17. The duties of the office are 
enumerated by Xenophon (Cyro.i. 3 f.) and by Herodotus (iii. 24). 
The cupbearer’s principal occupation was to taste the wine before 

he handed it to the king, as a proof that it was free from poison 

_ (See ii. r). Those who held the office had, at least in the time of 

Ktesias (d. circa 390 B.c.), to be eunuchs, and it is not improbable 

that Nehemiah was one, for we never read of his having a wife, 

though this last is true of Ezra too. The title Rabshakeh in 

- 2 Kings xviii. 17 and the parallel passage Isa. xxxvi. 2 is Babylo- 

“nian, and means ‘ principal military officer’ (So nearly all modern 

_ scholars) and not ‘cuptearer,’ as Ryle, Whitehouse, and (latterly) 

' Zimmern! say. Nehemiah, as cupbearer, had peculiarly favourable 

: Opportunities of becoming intimate with his royal master. 

_ ii, 1. the month Wisan: see on Ezrax. 17. 

-_ the twentieth year of Artaxerxes: i.e. of Artaxerxes I 

~ (Longimanus), whose reign began in 464 B.c. and ended with his 

death in 424 8.c. The twentieth year of his reign would be 


. therefore 444 B.C. 





; 






: It was in the seventh and eighth years of the same king that Ezra 
‘accomplistied his work at Jerusalem (see Conspectus, &c., p. 157 f.). 
; There were, however,two later Persian kings bearing the same 

“name, viz. Artaxerxes il (Mnemon, 404-359 B.c.) and Arta- 

_xerxes III (Ochus 359-338). Since the bare name is used in Ezra 


1 KAT.© 651. 


4 
































106 NEHEMIAH 2.3 5 





that I took up the wine, and gave it unto the king 
a I had not been deforetime sad in his presence. A 
king said unto me, Why is thy countenance sad, 
thou art not sick? this is nothing else but sorro 
3 heart. Then I was very sore afraid. And I said unt 
. .king, Let the king live for ever: why should not 
countenance be sad, when the city, the place of 
fathers’ sepulchres, lieth waste, and the gates, = ther 


on Ezra vii. 1). There has beensimilar disputing as to the Dz 
of Ezra iv. 24, v. 1, &c., since there were other Persian king: 
that name: see on ‘the above passages. ta 

(when wine was before) him: read (with LXX) ‘me 
=‘ when I hadcharge of the wine’ (Siegfried, &c.). The en 
in Hebrew arose through a haplography, i.e, writing the sa 
letter (waw) twice, a common clerical mistake. 

Now I had not, &c. : read and render, ‘ Now I had not bi 
beforetime sad,’ omitting in his presence and removing the ital 
from beforetime. The difference in Hebrew is in one only of 
the consonants. The M. T. =‘ Now I| was not sad in his presenc 
which contradicts the facts. ae 

2. Why is thy countenance sad? &c.: the Rupees 
expected to be cheerful and cheering. That Nehemiah’s 
was not due to physical illness was proved by his appearance: 
the fact that he had not requested leave of absence. 

sorrow of heart: 1.e. ‘sadness,’ &c., the noun being co 
with the adjective rendered ‘sad.’ In 1 Sam. xvii, 28 the 
Hebrew words are rightly rendered ‘ naughtiness of heart.’ 
adjective and noun have primarily ethical meanings. Cf. our 
‘bad’ or ‘good health,’ ‘ bad’ or ‘ good tidings,’ &c. 

Then I was very sore afraid, lest, having explained his 
trouble and his request, the king might deny him the favour itwaay 
in oe mind to ask. a 

. Let the king live for ever: the usual formula at the 7 

ing ‘of an address to the king: see Dan. ii. 4, iii. g. See . 
1 Kings i, 31 (Bathsheba to Solomon). . 

the city, the place of my fathers’ sepulchres: nace 
was therefore a Jerusalemite by descent, i.e. he belonged to Lac q 
tribe of Judah. 

place: in Hebrew the word used for house, but also for a ° 
containing place or space, e. g. Isa, iii. 20, ‘ ee aie boxes,’ a 
‘houses of perfume’ ; Exod. xxvi. 29, xxxv. 34, ‘places (‘ houses *) 
for the bars’ ; Ezek. xli. 9, ‘place (‘ hoa of ibe sid 


C} 


2% 


_ NEHEMIAH 2. 4-6. N > 167 





are consumed with fire? Then the king said unto me, 4 
For what dost thou make request? So I prayed to the 
God of heaven. And I said unto the king, If it please 5 
the king, and if thy servant have found favour in thy 
sight, that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto the 
‘city of my fathers’ sepulchres, that I may build it. And 6 
"the king said unto me, (the queen also sitting by him,) — 

For how long shall thy journey be? and when wilt thou 








_ bers.’ Cf. also the numerous place-names compounded with 
Beth (house), as Bethlehem =‘ House of Bread,’ i.e. place where 
wheat is abundant, &c. 

Ryleand Bertholet are hardly justified in pressing the literal 
sense ‘house,’ from the fathers having been buried in the house 
(cf. 1 Sam. xxv.1; 1 Kings ii. 34), i.e. in the garden attached to 
_the house (cf.2 Kings xxi. 18). 
The ancients attached great importance to the honour of 
: proper interment, and paid the deepest respect to the burial-places 
of ancestors, See on Ps. Ixxix. 3 (Century Bible). 
consumed: lit. ‘eaten,’ as in ver. 13. In ver. 17,1. 3, &¢,, 
____ the word is ‘ burnt.’ 
4 4. For what dost thou make request? Either Nehemiah had 
4 indicated in words that he had a request to make or his appearance 
suggested the king’s question. 
I prayed: i.e. inwardly. Nehemiah was pre-eminently a man 
“of prayer ; see iv. 4, 9, V. 19, Vi. 9, 14, xiii. 14. 
God of heaven: See on Ezra vi. 9. 

5. Ifitplease the king, &c.: the regular formula when making pro- 

_ posals to the king. It occurs very often in Esther (seei. 19, ili. 9, &c.). 

build: the Hebrew word means also, as here, ‘to rebuild.’ 
So Ezra v. 13, 15, 17, vi. 3, &c. Here it refers specifically to the 
repairing of the walls, asin Ezra iv, 12, 16, 21. 

6. the queen, &c: the queen (called Damasias according to 
Ktesias) here separately mentioned on account of the influence 
she had over her husband. Cf..Queen Esther and the part she 
played in directing her husband’s policy. Persian kings acted — 
much as their queens guided them. : 

The word rendered queen occurs besides only in Ps. xlv. 9,’ 
"and judging from Assyrian etymology it denotes strictly a member - 
: of the royal harem, a palace woman. But it was the principal 
- member who acted as queen, she having all the more influence 

because she owed her supreme position to her continued charms. 

Such a woman had in those times far more completely the ear and 

heart of the husband than a one-wife queen could have. 


ye. ee 















168 NEHEMIAH 22. 7, 8. 


return? So it pleased the king to send me ; and 
7himatime. Moreover I said unto the king, If it p - 
the king, let letters be given me to the governors — 
the river, that they may let me pass through till I come™ os 


: 


8 unto Judah; and a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the 
king’s * forest, that he may-give me timber to make beams 2 
for the gates of the castle which appertaineth to the house, 
* Or, park 2 


I set him: better read with Winckler}, ‘he set me.’ BK mt: 
time: a period of twelve years—the space of Nehemiah’s 
first absence — could hardly have been in the mind of either the © i 
king or his cupbearer. It probably grew to that through unex- © 
pected difficulties in the building and in the administration. ame 
7. letters: see on Ezra iv. 8. The letters would be written ~ 
in Aramaic, the language of diplomacy at this time, seep. 13. We ~ 
are probably to think of parchment rolls as the material (see Jer. ] 


‘ ease 





XXXVi. I, 2, 4), ink (Jer. xxxvi. 18), and an iron stylus (Jer. xvii. 
1) or reed pen (Ezek. ix. 2) being employed in writing. See on 
Ezra iv.8. The Tel-el-Amarna tablets prove that in 1400 B.C 
letters were written on clay tablets dried in the sun or baked in | § 
a kiln, and that they were in the cuneiform character. The Tel-ceg 
Amarna letters were baked in kilns, see on Ezra vi. 2. ‘i 
governors beyond the river: the ‘ pekhahs’ or ‘ governors © 
of Transpotamia’: see on Ezra iy. ro (for the designation Trans- 
petamia) and on Ezra viii. 36 and ver. 9 (for governors, &c.). a 
that they may let me pass, &c. : suggesting the existence — 
among the governors of a feeling of opposition to the project Nehe- ~ 
miah had at heart. See on Ezra iv. 7-23, and at p. 160, whereitis 
held that this section belongs toa time not long before Nehemiah’s_ 
- first visit. = 
8. Asaph: otherwise unknown. The name suggests that he 2a 
was a Jew, and therefore probably a native of Jerusalem. as 
king’s forest: since Ewald’s time most scholars identify this ~ 
with the ‘Garden of Solomon,’ close to Etam, some half-dozen ~ 
miles to the south of Jerusalem (see Josephus, Antiq., viii. 7, 3). 
The forest of Lebanon is too far away to be intended here; the 
timber wanted must have been near. $j 
The word rendered forest is the Hebrew form of ‘ paradise,” 
originally a Persian word. : The same word in Eccles. ii. 5 and 





Cant. iv. 13 means ‘park.’ a 
for the gates of : Mommert (iv. 4) connects these words with 
wall and house, rendering ‘for the gates of the castle... and for © 
1 Altor. Forsch. ii, Series iii, 2. 473 i he ol 


ue 
~ = if ne 


ane 










—~ 


for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall a 


‘governors beyond the river, and gave them the kings 


_ the city wall and for the house,’ &c. But the Hebrew cannot 
_ yield this translation. : 
= the castle: Heb. hab-birah, asin ver. t (see on). A fortress 

'- onthe north side of the Temple, first mentioned here and vii. 2. 
- Itis referred to later in 1 Macc. xiii. 52 ; Acts xxi. 37 and xxii. 24. — 
_ Itseems to have been erected between 536 and 445, probably at 
a the time the Temple was restored about-520, though nothing more 

_ definite is known. Later names were Baris and Antonia (see 
~ Josephus, Wars, i. 3, 3, &c.). Mommert, curiously (iv. 4), under-- 
_ Stands by the castle the whole wall-enclosed Temple area. 3 
B= according to the good hand of my God: see ver. 18 and 
Ezra vii. 6, viii. 18, 22. ~ 
- -g-16, Nehemiah’s arrival at Jerusalem ; his tour of the city and 
_ Ais impressions. 
_- 9. governors beyond the river: since Transpotamia (‘be- ~ 
— yond the river’) had but one satrap, the word ‘ governors’ must, 
_ as in the Sachau papyri, include the local governors appointed by 
_ the satrap, often, as in the case of Ezra and Nehemiah, and in 
_ accordance with Persian policy, one of the race inhabiting the 
_ subsatrapy. The use of the word pekhah (plur. here) proves that 
» it does not invariably mean, as Meyer holds, satrap. When for 
_ purposes of administration Darius I divided his greatly extended 
— kingdom into twenty satrapies, carrying out more fully the policy 
" of Cyrus, he made Babylon and Assyria one satrapy, Syria, 
’ Phoenicia, and the island of Cyprus another, and Egypt with | 
- contiguous lands a third’. On crossing the Euphrates Nehemiah 
" would pass through one satrapy only until he reached Jerusa- 
lem: see p. 50. On his way from Shushan he would be likely to 
_ make a halt at Babylon, where a satrap resided. The letters 
__ referred to in ver. 7 would include one to this satrap. 
Pi - Leaving Babylon and crossing the Euphrates, he would be at 
"once in what the present writer calls Transpotamia. The direction 
__ would nowlie towards Carchemish, avoiding the Arabian and Syrian ~ 
_ deserts. Thence the party would turn southwards to Damascus, 
__where the satrap of Transpotamia almost certainly dwelt, though 
_ before reaching the Syrian capital he would be likely to encounter 
" local governors, Arab sheikhs, &c., to whom he would present what 
_ One may call royal passports. Then the company would strike 










__ * See Duncker, Geschichte. des Alterthums, iv. 523 ff. (E.V. vi. 
_ 315 ff.); Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, iii. 49 ff. 


enter into. And the king granted me, according to the 
‘good hand of my God uponme. ThenI came to the9 ~ 


170 NEHEMIAH 2. wo. ! 








and Tobiah the servant, the Ammonite, heard of it, 


Southward in the direction of Samaria, taking, it is probable, 
west Jordan route, or perhaps that east of the Jordan, crossin 
the river at one of the fords between the sea of Galilee and the 
Dead Sea. At Samaria Nehemiah would meet the local sub- 
satrap or governor, who was probably Sanballat. To the latter ~ 
he would present the usual credentials which, as explaining the 
purpose of Nehemiah’s journey, would awaken in the local authori 
ties the liveliest feelings of antagonism, for it was but recently ( 
pp. 84 f. and 160) that they had thwarted the execution of the He 
task which the new Jewish leader had royal authority to complete, 
captains, &c.: Ezra made his journey without a military , 
escort (Ezra viii. 22), perhaps, as Bertheau says, because he was ~ 
ashamed as a professed believer in Yahweh to question the — 
sufficiency of Divine guidance. 7S 

10. Sanbaliat: the best Heb. MSS. write ‘Saneballat.’ In the | ja 
LXX and Vulg. it is ‘Sanaballat’ (one 7 in Luc.), in Josephus ~ 
‘Sanaballet(es).’ The word is Babylonian, and means ‘one whom — =f 
Sin’ (the Moon-god) ‘preserves alive.’ 

There can now be no doubt that Sanballat was governor, i.e. cube >. 
satrap in Samaria, exercising at the time, it is extremely likely, _ a 
jurisdiction over Judah and even over other adjoining districts - 
(see iv. 7, Arabs, Ammonites, and Ashdodites). Heis spoken of 
in the Sachau papyri as governor (fekhah) of Samaria, and Josephus: se 
says? (though his date is wrong, see p. 179) that he was sent by 

the last king’ (Darius Codomannus, 338-331) ‘into Samaria.” 2 
Nehemiah nowhere calls Sanballat governor, yet he brings him 
into connexion with Samaria (see iv. 2). 

the Horonite: this is generally held to mean a native of x 
- Beth-Horon, north-west of Jerusalem, at that time belonging fh 
Samaria (see Joshua xvi. 3, 5, &c.). This agrees with what 4 
Josephus says*® (‘He was a Kuthean’), and with iv. 2 properly 
interpreted (see on). Moreover, the language in iv. 2 suggests 
that he spoke to the Samaritans in their own (his own ?) language. 
So Buhl ‘ and G. A. Smith 5. 5 
Schlatter, Winckler, and Bertholet say that the word denotes 
‘a native of Horonaim,’ a south Moabite city (see Isa. xv. 55 ~ 
Jer. xlviii. 3, 5, 34, and the Moabite stone). This is thought to 
explain why he constantly appears in conjunction with Tobiah 
the Ammonite, but see below. 
Tobiah the servant, the Ammonite: the fact that his 


1 § 20. 2 Antig. xi. 7, 2. * ‘Ibid. ae 
S Prag des alt. Pal. 169. 5 Ferusalem, ii. 336£. 


+ 


“ 
3 
; 
g 
3 





"7 
. 
. 

- 

¥ 









ieved ‘hen Eesincy, for that there was come a man 


3 the night, I and some few men with me; neither told 


‘name and that of his son are compounded with Yah (short 
writing of Yahweh) shows that he was a Yahweh worshipper, 
though it is no proof of his being a Jew. Those who belonged 
to the Samaritan party were genuine Yahwists or they would not 
_ have wished to unite in restoring the Temple. They differed 
from Jews in having wider sympathies and a broader creed, and_ 
also in having foreign blood. We know of them almost exclusively 
_ from what their rivals have written. It is hardly likely that ‘Am- 


' of the Benjamite village Chephar-ammoni (Joshua xviii. 24),as the 
_ word occurs often elsewhere and invariably in the ordinary sense. 
2 Besides, according to xiii. 4 ff., he was not of Jewish descent. Why 
should not this man, though racially an Ammonite, having entered 
_the service of a Yahwist, have embraced his master’s religion 
and then changed his name according to a common custom ? 
servant: the word so translated means often a slave (Gen. 
Kii. 16; Exod. xxi: 2, &c.), but it is also commonly used for 


j _monite’ means here, as G. A. Smith is inclined to think}, a native — 


’ for other officials of quite respectable position (see 2 Sam. x. 2, 4, 
royal messengers, &c.). 

s It is probable that Tobiah was the secretary of Sanballat, the 
_ governor of Samaria: see vi.17. The word translated ‘ servant’ 
| is by no means inconsistent with this, Winckler’s guess? (it isno 
. more) that Tobiah was Sanballat’s son is not worthy of serious 





consideration. 
it grieved them, &c., because their former successful oppo- 
' sition was now apparently to come to nought: see p. 160. 
+ a man: Heb. ‘a human being’ (= Gr. anthropos, L. homio), 
_ used contemptuously. The ordinary word for man as dis- 
_ tinguished from woman is isk (= Gr. aner, L. vir). Perhaps, 
_ however, the sense is ‘ that any one (man or woman) liad come,’ 
_&c. ; the use of the same Hebrew word in ver. 12 favours the latter 
_ ‘explanation. 
: 11. Nehemiah took no notice of the Samaritan ill-will, but went 
on his way. With the royal letters even Sanballat could not 
: ~ hinder his progress. 
With ver. 11 cf. Ezra viii. 32, which is almost word for word 
the same. 
- 12. in the night: to avoid being seen. 


* See Encyc. Bib. i. 559. ? KAT.© 206. 





to seek the welfare of the children of Israel. So I came rt 
_ to Jerusalem, and was there three days. And I arose in 12~ 


7 


Officials of the court (see Gen. xl. 20, l. 7; Exod. x. 7, &c.) and © 





















os any man what my God vie into my beat te eae or 
salem: neither was there any beast with me, save 
tn “13 beast that I rode upon. And I went out by night by 


what my God put into my heart: see vii. 5 and 
. vii. 27. 
E the beast that I rode upon: i.e. an ass, less likely a mule. 
The Hebrew word is a generic one for horses, asses, and mules," 
: ‘and has nearly always a collective sense. Nehemiah had but on 
_. animal, to obviate suspicion; his servants would walk, just as is: 
done in Palestine at the present time. 


13-15. Nehemiah’s tour of inspection. It will be seen that hi 
_~ began and ended at the Valley Gate, having made, it is probable, 
a complete circuit of the city wall. Dr. E. Robinson? held t 
Nehemiah, when he reached the King’s Pool (ver. 14), descende 
from the beast, which was hindered from going further by the ruin 
__heaps, and proceeded along the Kidron way, looking at the 
ae _ Temple walls, &c. Returning to where he left his beast, he- oa 
_-__-made the journey back to the Valley Gate by the way he 
‘So Professor F. F. Wright, who says? that having approached 
the city wall by the northern road Nehemiah had no further n 
to examine the northern walls. If, as the present writer believes, 
Nehemiah followed the entire course of the wall, one must think — 
of him as on foot guiding the beast where the heaps of débris 
made riding impossible. See a further statement of various views — 
in Mommert, vol. (Theil) iv. 5 ff. We have in these verses, in fi. 
-_ i-32 and in xii. 27-43, the completest data to be obtained for ~ 
reconstructing the plan of ancient Jerusalem. Notwithstanding — 
the mass of learned and ingenious matter which has been written 
on these chapters, much uncertainty still attaches to details. 
References might be made to the large volume with a small 
volume as appendix by Carl Mommert, Topographie des ali 
__ Jerusalem (1900- 1907); Jerusalem, &c., by George Adam Smi 
* D.D., 2 vols. (1907) ; Ancient Jerusalem, by Selah Merrill 508 . 
; endl. B. Paton, Jerusalem in Bible Times, Dr. Smith’s work can’ 
be too highly commended for its sanity, learning, and interesting~* 
style: see especially vol. i. 3: ff. As a guide to the notes to 
these topographical sections the map of Jerusalem in the time of 
Nehemiah will, it is thought, be found useful, see opposite p. 159. © 
13. valley ‘gate: the name suggests that this gate opened 2 
fon. upon the Valley of Hinnom (Wady-er-Rababi), the word trans-— 
~ lated ‘valley’ ( gai’) being used in the O.T. of this one only a 


¥ 
es 
I 

o-. 















1_Bib. Researches, i. 474- * PEF, tote 173% 3 




































x ihe Jerusalem valleys'. It must have lain near the southewele 
- corner of the walls. In 1894 Dr. Bliss? uncovered the remains of — 
an ancient gateway at the south-west corner of the ancient walls 
which he, Guthe, Mitchell, and G. A. Smith concluded to be the 
‘site of this gate, though the distance from the Dung Gate is rather 
‘more than 1,000 cubits (see iii. 93), and further excavation 
has shown that the remains are not very ancient. Formerly this 
gate was placed where the Jaffa Gate now stands: so Thenius, Keil, 
Schick, Ryle, and Harvie-Jellie (on 2 Chron. xxvi. 9, Century Bible), 
the dragon’s well: we know it lay somewhere along the 
= direction of the wall between the Valley and Dung Gates, but 
_ where exactly we have no data to determine. It has been com- 
_ monly identified with the modern Bir Eyysib (Job’s Well), which — 
: peebly represents the site of En-Rogel (see 1 Kings i. 9, &c.), 
ut 


~ of wall. Perhaps, as G. A. Smith’ surmises, it was a spring, © 
_ due to an earthquake, and only temporary in duration, for it is 
not mentioned before or after the time of Nehemiah. It may have 
: Peeves its name from the belief that a mythical dragon resided 
“in the fountain: so W. Rob. Smith, Rel. Sem.© 172, and most 
_ moderns: but this is very problematical. The LXX calls it ‘the 
_ Fig Fountain,’ which may be correct, i. e. ‘ the fountain near which ~ 
- figs grow.’ Luc. supports the M. T. The Hebrew is much alike 
‘forboth. The Syr. renders, ‘the Gate of the Hills.’ 
- the dung gate: situated probably near the point where the 
__ Tyropoeon Valley (e/-Wad) joins the Valley of Hinnom (Wady- 
_ er-Rababi), perhaps where the modern Bab-el-Magharibe stands. 
_ Some identify this gate with the Harsith Gate (Gate of Potsherds) 
_ mentioned in Jer. xix. 2. This last was perhaps the gate 
_ through which potsherds were thrown, or rather, outside which 
on a rock, as now, broken earthenware was crushed into cement 
Tor plastering ates. &c.* The name Dung Gate (Heb. and 
~ Syr., ‘Ashheap Gate’; Luc., LXX, Vulg., ‘Dung Hill Gate’) 
may have been given, as Stade and others after him say, because 
the refuse of the city was conveyed through it. Gall,° followed 
~ hesitatingly by Bertholet, sees in the Hebrew name a disguised 
form of Tophet,® itself a disguised form of Tephet, and so 
"explains : ‘The Gate leading to the Molek (a disguised form of ~ 
_ melek™) sanctuary where children were sacrificed.’ 

= and viewed: the Hebrew tense is continuous = ‘I kept on 


= See G. A. Smith, Ferus.i.171. 7? PEF., 1894, 149 ff., 243 ff 

- * op. cit. i. 74, cf. 111. 3 
~* PEF., 1904, p- 156. 5 Altis. Kult., 72. 
® See on Ps. cvi. 38 (Century Bible). 


; = on Ps. exxxii, 2 (Century Bible). 


this would be too far to the south-east and not along the lie xs 






























4 
7 





got from the Aramaic, in which the simple verb means ‘to 


fe change in the Hebrew. This verb means often ‘to clos 


a fire. Then I went on to the fountain gate and tor he 


_ 15 under me to pass. Then went I up in the night by 


unlikely thing for him to do. By changing a diacritical point on 
one letter (sh, s)—making no difference in the original unpointed 


and explain as above, ‘to break through’ = to make way am 
_ following often introduces the object. 


King’s Pool, whence it had its name. It lay at the junction of th 


broken down, and the ee thereof were const 


_king’s pool: but there was no place for the beast that y 


viewing.’ The Hebrew verb as written in the M.T. (so LXX 
means ‘to break,’ and has been here explained: ‘1 broke r 
way through the walls,’ i.e, the fragments of walls. ie 


Hebrew text—we obtain an Aramaic verb, which occurs — 
in the intensive form (Pi.) in the sense to hope, wait 
(see Esther ix. 1; Ps. civ. 21, cix. 166, cxlv, 155 Isa. xxxviii. 
But the sense ‘ think, ’ then (with the preposition here) to ‘ thi 
about,’ though upheld by Baer, Ginsburg, and Guthe, cannot 


believe,’ ‘trust,’ and the intensive (Pa.) Ps hope for,’ nor fron 
the O.'T. passages cited above, in which the verb (P7.) =‘ 
hope,’ ‘wait for.’ Either we must keep the verb in the M. 


(the walls), or we must decide the text to be corrupt. Perhay 
we should read shomer for shober, which requires very lit 


scrutinize,’ as in 1 Sam. i. 12; Job xxxix. 1, &c. The prepositi 


walls: so Heb. M.T., Syr., and Luc. But LXX 
Vulg. have the sing. ‘ wall. . 
_ consumed : see on ver. 3. 
14. fountain gate: probably the gate which lay just outside 






Hinnom and Kidron valleys, at the southernmost end of what w " 
once a busy street. It would be a little to the north-east of co 
Dung Gate: see plan of Jerusalem opposite p. 159. B, 
the king’s pool: probably=the modern Birket-el-Ham 
(‘the Red Pool”) : see plan of Jerusalem, opposite p. 159. It sme 
to have received its name from the fact that it stood near ‘ 
entrance to the royal gardens which it watered: see 2 Kings — 
xxv. 4; Jer. xxxix. 4, lii. 7. a 
no place, &c.: on account of the broken-down walls. — 
the beast that was under me: i. €. SO long as I rode. 
to pass: lit. “to cross,” ‘ pass over,’ referring to the rub 
in the way. Seeon Esther iv. 17. , 


‘ 





$2] 


n 


— 


wily» 2 oy: tie 


= 
¢ 


C 


brook, and viewed the wall; and I turned back, and 
entered by the valley gate, and so returned. And the 16 


*rulers knew not whither I went, or what I did; neither 


- had I as yet told it to the Jews, nor to the priests, nor to 


the nobles, nor to the ? rulers, nor to the rest that did the 


work: Then said I unto them, Ye see the evil case that « 


® Or; deputies 





15. in the night: it was still night, and Nehemiah wishes to 
lay stress on this. The Palestine night varies only between eleven 
and thirteen hours, 

the brook: better ‘wady’: the Hebrew word (nakhal) 
=the Arabic wady, i. e. a winter torrent valley. This is the word 
always used of the Kidron, which must therefore be here meant. 
Gai’, the word in the phrase ‘Valley of Hinnom,’ denotes a 
Narrower opening and one without a brook. Nehemiah went up 


the Kidron valley, from which he could, especially on the higher 


ground, have a good view of the Temple wall and of much of the 
Temple itself. 

turned back: Heb. ‘turned,’ that is its primary sense and its 
sense here. Having passed through the wady, he would, follow- 
ing the wall, make a tour towards the east, encompassing the 
walls until he was once more at the Valley Gate. : 

and so returned: the verb is here rightly translated, It is 
a trick of the author, a word-play, to use the same verb in two 
different senses in the same paragraph. 

16-18. The Jews, on hearing Nehemiah explain his project, agree 
heartily to co-operate with him. 

16. rulers: Heb. (seganim) equivalent in this book to the 
word so common in Ezra and translated ‘princes’: see on Ezra 
ix. 1. Nehemiah brought it from Persia, though it is of 
-Babylonian origin. It occurs but once in Ezra (ix. 2), and 

then almost certainly as a gloss. 
nobles : lit. ‘freedmen,’ Nehemiah’s equivalent for ‘elders’ 


“(see on Ezra x. 8). It occurs in the Sachau papyri (i. 19),. 


* Bagohi (governor of Judah) and the Khorimz’ (not as Sachau 
Khérim) ‘of the Jews,’ where ‘elders’ makes good sense. 
nor to the rest, &c, : render, ‘nor tothe others who had been 


_ doing the work.’ The Heb. permits this rendering, and the sense 


requires it, The reference is to what had been done before Nehe- 
miah’s arrival, but was stopped by the Samaritan party (see p. 160). 
There is not the slightest need to explain with Meyer and Bertholet, 
“the others who were performing the religious rites of the Jews.’ 


17. See on ver, 3. 
x at Tn s N 


"NEHEMIAH 2. 16,17. N’ ae 


‘ 


- 


i 


20 


- Geshem might have been commissioned by his tribe, still dwelli 


tothe Jews. In either ‘of the two latter alternatives the Arabs, of 


had spoken unto me. And they said, Let us rise up a 


_ the servant, the Ammonite, and Geshem the Arabia 










176. ~~ NEHEMIAH 2, 


tik cs, 
we are in, how Jerusalem lieth waste, and 


- thereof are burned with fire: come and let us bu 


was Good upon me; as also of the king’s words that } ne 


heard it, they laughed us to scorn, and despised us, a 
said, What is this thing that ye do? will ye rebel agai 

















18. rise: see on Ezra x. 4. ‘Let us set aoe building,’ ae i 
So they strengthened, &c. : better (with Luc., LKX, V ‘ 
not Syr.) passive: ‘So their hands were strengthened,’ &e. Se 
for the antithetic phrase Ezra iv. 4. 
19. Opposition. 
For Sanballat and Tobiah see on ver. ro. 
Geshem : see vi. 2 and 6. In the latter verse it has the 
form ‘Gashmu,’ which occurs repeatedly in the Sinaitic inscrip- 
tions !, and should probably be read here and in vi. 2. The final “is 
the sign ofthe Semitic nominative, of which there are survivals 
the O.T. (see G. K., § 90n.). He seems like Tobiah? to ha 
accepted the religion. of the Samaritans and to be now identified 
with them against the Jews. He might hae been head of aclan 
which had settled in Samaria. We know. that Sargon transplanted — 
the Arab tribe Thamud to Samaria. There is a third alternative ;_ 


in their Arab homeland, to represent them in Samaria’s oppositi 


whom Geshem was chief, might have accepted Samaritanism as a 


5 religion, or their opposition might have been due to a general 


1 See Euting, No. 58, 167, 345. 2 See on ver. I 








uprising of the peoples around against the Jews and 
designs. 
will ye rebel? In reference probably to the correspondence 
recorded in Ezra iv. 7-23. See esp. ver. 15. 
20. Nehemiah’s answer of faith. 
The God of heaven: see on Ezra vi. 9, 


























rebiee 
er. 2 


P | NEHEMIAH Die tN Wy 
St .... will arise a build : but ye have no portion, nor 
right,” nor memorial, in Jerusalem. 


will prosper us: see i. II. 
his servants: see on i. 6, 

arise: see on Ezra x. 4. 

puild: i.e. rebuild; see on ver. 5. 

no portion: see Joshua xx. 25; 2 Sam. xx. I. 
i right: the Hebrew word occurs in the Sachau papyri, 
_ i. 27, in the sense of ‘a fixed share,’ which is therefore almost 
_ certainly its meaning here. 
4 memorial = ‘ something to be remembered by,’ see Ezra xvii. 
- 14; Num. xvi. 40, xxxi. 54; Mal. iii. 16. Had the Samaritans 
and their allies been fully incorporated into the Jewish com- 
Besunity and allowed to share in the rebuilding of Temple and 
i city walls their names would have been handed down as those whe 

"helped in the restoration of the city and its sanctuary. 
_ Nehemiah’s reply makes it clear enough that the Samaritans 
would have had no quarrel with the Jews if they had been per- 
"mitted to unite with the latter in their undertakings and privileges. 


Il]. NAMES OF THOSE WHO REPAIRED THE SEVERAL PORTIONS 


™ OF THE WALL. 


This chapter is of the utmost importance for the understanding 
of the topography of Jerusalem in the days of Nehemiah, and 
“much has been written on it by scholars who have made a special 
‘study of the subject, such as Wilson, Warren, Guthe, Bliss, 
"Schick, G. Adam Smith. Neh. iii. 13-15 and xii. 27-43 are also 
f great importance in the same direction. 

The text in this chapter is unfortunately very corrupt in parts 
See on verses 1, 9) and the account defective owing to the drop- 
ping out of words through the carelessness of copyists. The 
Ephraim Gate is not mentioned, though it must have been named 
in the original account (but see on ver. 6 and on xii. 39); the 
f ‘description of the east wall is evidently incomplete (see on 
verses 25, 27), and in several cases persons are said to have 
repaired a second portion who are not mentioned in connexion 
with a first (see on ver. 9). 

It has been inferred by Torrey? and Kent?, from the special 
features of vocabulary and style in this section, that the Chronicler, 
or at least another than Nehemiah, is the author. But nowhere 
either in Ezra or in Nehemiah is there so detailed a description of 
_ Jerusalem as in this chapter, and one might expect this peculiarity 





>. + Composition, &c., 37 f. 
ce pisraet’s Historical and Biographical Naragriaess P- 352- 


.  N2 i 































_ of subject-matter to carry with it corresponding peculi 
language, especially where so many technical and 
terms are employed. On the other hand, the pendoal ig 
very prominent throughout, and it is clear that . Nehemiah « 
tinues in the first person to tell his own tale. 

The course taken by the description is regular, though that h 
been denied. The following outline sets forth the probable ¢ 
tion taken by the narrator in the account he gives. Verses 1 
deal with the north wall. 

1. The Sheep Gate in the north, about the middle of 
northern extremity of the present Haram area, formed 
Starting-point (1 f.). 

2. Thence westward passing the towers of Hammeah 
Hananel to the Fish Gate (3-5). By 
3. The western wall (6-12). 
4. The southern wall and gates, including the Valley and I Dur 
Gates (13 f.). ‘ 

5: The south-east wall and gates (15-27). ee 

. The north-east wall—completion (28-32). : a 


1-5. The North and North-west Wall. 

i. Eliashib (=‘ God will restore’; in Luc. the form is % 
Yashub = ‘ God will turn or return’). Several persons with f 
name are mentioned in Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles: 
1 Chron. iii. 24 (a descendant of Zerubbabel) ; ; Ezra x. 14, 295; 
&c. The ‘Eliashib the high priest’ of verses r and 20 was 
of Joiakim and grandson of Jeshua (see on Ezra ii. 2), the 
temporary of Zerubbabel. He is called ‘the priest’ (= 
priest, see 2 Kings xi. of., xvi. tof.) in Neh. xiii. 4. Feo 
high-priesthood see on Ezra vii. 5. According to xii. to Elias 
was the great-grandfather of Jaddua, the contemporary 
Alexander the Great, see on Ezra x. 6. 

Later on there arose a schism between Nehemiah and 
reforming party on the one hand, and Eliashib and the I: 
broader ?) party on the other, the principal occasions for which 
were the following incidents: Being related by marriage t 
Tobiah (see on ii. 10), Eliashib made it possible for the latter & 
enter the priesthood though not of priestly descent, and actually 
allotted him one of the chambers in the Temple area (see xii eS] ; 
All this happened in Nehemiah's absence, as he himself is caref 
to tell us (xiii. 6). On his return this anomaly was rectifies 
Tobiah being expelled from his office and chamber. Soon 
this courageous act the Jewish reformer felt it his duty to di 
from the priesthood a grandson of Eliashib because he hail 
himself by marriage with Sanballat the Horonite (xi 
































® Or, The hundred 


atter Josephus gives a different account, for it is certain that i ine 
ig. xi. 7, 2 and 8, 2f, he has this incident in mind. According __ 
him, a certain Manassi, son of Jaddua (and therefore great- 
reat-grandson of Eliashib), married Nikaso, daughter of Sanballat 
Kuthaean. He was expelled from the priesthood for refusing to 
"put her away, whereupon he took refuge among the Samaritans, 
who welcomed him as the son of their governor and were glad to 
point him priest of their rival Gerizim temple. Josephus, it — 
will be seen, dates the incident about the time of Alexander the 
Great, if not later, but there is abundant evidence that the 
amaritan party had been organized many decades before this, 
d there is proof in the Sachau papyri (i. 29) that Sanballat was 
a contemporary of Nehemiah-(avca 440 B.c. f 
S rose up... and... builded = ‘set about building’: see — 
oe 
_ the sheep gate: lit. ‘gate of the small cattle (sheep and 
oats)’: so also ver. 32 and xii. 39. It lay near the north-east 
corner of the Temple area, a little to the west of the modern 
St. Stephen’s Gate, and hence its restoration fell appropriately to 
1¢ lot of the priests. It is likely that just outside this gate there was 



























Ss rposes of sacrifice, the Temple being near, but also, it would 
‘em, for other purposes. This gate is no doubt the one referred 





they sanctified it, and, &c.: render, ‘they laid its beams 
Set up its doors even to the tower of Hammeah (the hundred) 
| to the tower of Hananel.’ 
they sanctified it (and): this is never said of any other 
or of any part of fhe wall. Read (making a slight chats 3 
e Hebrew), ‘they laid its beams’ (see ver. 3). If the M. T. 
ined the consecration of the gate might have been due to its 
‘neal ness to the Temple, to its market for sacrificial animals, and — 
so to thé fact that it was repaired by priests. The second 
occurrence of they sanctified it is to be deleted as a copyist’s — 
mistake (dittography). 
the tower of Hammeah: both this tower and that of — 
nanel were probably situated upon the rock on which Antonia 
‘see ii. 8) stood; they were therefore somewhat to the west of 
je Sheep Gate. 
hy is the ‘Tower of the Hundred’ (Hammeah) so called? 
in but guess, as we are not told. Some say because it was 











180° NEHEMIAH : 3. 






3 And the fish gate did the sons of Hassenaah build ; 
laid the beams thereof, and set up the doors thereof, the 
4 bolts thereof, and the bars thereof, And next unto them 
repaired Meremoth the son of Uriah, the son of Hakkoz. 

® Heb. him. ne 4 


Pil 


too cubits high, others because it was reached by too steps, al 
third opinion being that it was defended by 100 men. Perhaps — 
Hammeah was a man’s name: see below. Itis mentioned besides — 
here only in xii. 39. % ae 

tower of Hananel (= ‘whom God pities or favours’: a ke 
name): from xii. 39 and Jer. xxxi. 8 we infer that it stood 
the north of the city, and from verses 1-3 and Zech. xiv. to that it 
was between the Sheep and Fish Gates. 

It is probable that these two towers formed parts of one foes, 
perhaps that subsequently called Antonia: see on ii. 8. 

2. (next unto) him, i.e. Eliashib, his co-workers 
ignored. Perhaps, however, we should read ‘ them,’ as alsou 
ver. 8. The singular and plural are frequently confounded i in phe 
phrases throughout this chapter. The Hebrew means literally ‘at 
his hand,’ i.e. joining hands with (ina free, not literal, sense), 

. the men of Jericho: the Jericho contingent repaired’ the 4 
part of the wall that was nearest to their home (the priests pre~ — 
ceding them because their part touched the Temple). ron 
site of Jericho see on Ezra ii. 34. _ 

(next to) them: Heb. ‘him.’ The E.VV. rightly correct 
the M. T. : see earlier note on this verse. 33 
Zaccur: nowhere else mentioned. i 

3. the fish gate (see xii. 39): situated probably at or near. 
where the modern Damascus Gate stands, It was separated fro: 
the two towers mentioned in ver. 1 (Antonia?) by the strip off 
wall mended by the Jerichoites and Zaccur. It was in all likeli-— 
hood so called because outside of it there was a fish market: see 
on ver .1, ‘Sheep Gate.’ According to Zephaniah it seems to haved 
been in the new part of the city ; see 2 Chron, xxxiv. 14. «Oe 

sons of Hassenaah : see vii. 38 (Senaah) and Ezra li. 35. . 

doors thereof: i.e. the two-leaved door (hence the plural), ; 
filling in the space of the gateway: see on Vi. I. 

bolts: the sockets right and left of the doors, into which the 
ends of the horizontal bars were slid when the door was locked. 
They were used for house doors (Cant. v. 3) as well as for city gat 

4. repaired: lit. ‘ strengthened,’ made to be a eas 
capable of holding out against besiegers. 






















3 
/ 
being 
| 
: 





d next. unto them repaired Meshullam the son os 
Berechiah, the son of Meshezabel. And next unto — 
.t them repaired Zadok the ‘son re Baana. And next unto 5 










® Or, lords. Or, Lord 
> Or, the gate of the old city or, of the old wall 








* Meremoth: as he repaired a double portion (ver. 21) itis. 
natural to think that he was wealthy and the family of which he 
: ‘9 was head numerous. From Ezra viii. 33 we learn that he was be 
son of the high-priest Uriah. 
_ Meshullam : through the marriage of his daughter to 
Tobiah’s son (vi, 18) he was related to that leader of the ; 
a - Samaritan party. In the present undertaking, however, if not 
‘in all things, he is a co-worker with Nehemiah. Zerubbabel had 
_ason of the same name (1 Chron. iii, 19). ; 
a _ Baana: see vii. 7, x. 27, and Ezrail. 2. 
_ §. Tekoites: Tekoah was the home of the prophet Amos + Shard 
_ (Amos i. 1, vii. 14), though he exercised his prophetic ministry — 
in the Northern Kingdom. It lay some ten miles to the south of 
Jerusalem, and we might therefore have expected to find the ~ 
' men of Tekoa rebuilding the southern wall which was nearest A. 
a to them: see ver. 2 (‘men of Jericho’). Its omission from the 
lists i in Ezra ii, Neh. vii may be caused by the fact that Jews had 
not at the time implied settled in it, or not in large numbers. 
- nobles (Heb. addivim, lit. ‘strong ones’): so x. 295 
_2 Chron, xxiii. 20. It is another Hebrew word (Khorim) that is 
“so translated in ii. 16 (see on), iv. 14, v. 17, vi. 16, vii. 5, and xiii, 17. 
: put not their necks, &c.: for the figure see Jer. xxvii. 12 a 
and Matt. xi. 209. : 
their lord: i.e. Nehemiah, governor of the district, and_ Wet 
therefore of Tekoa. Nehemiah’s opponents were for the ’ most ashen 
part members of the upper classes, since those guilty of marrying == 
_ ‘strange women’ belonged chiefly to those classes. Jewish and = 
_ other expositors understood the word ‘lord’ to mean God. “eat 
6-12. The Western Wail. 
: 6. the old gate: the Hebrew (‘Gate of the Old,’ see R. Vm.,- 
M ‘gate’ being masculine and ‘old’ feminine) does not allow of this” 
a rendering. Itis far better with G, A. Smith to make a trifling change © 
ame ‘in the Hebrew, rendering ‘the gate of the second (city).’? The Fish 
Gate (see on ver. 3) was also, it would seem, in the new or second _ 
city. It is now generally held that this gate is identical with the 
_ *€orner Gate’ (2 Kings xiv. 13; 2 Chron, xxvi.9; Jer. xxxi, 38) 
nd the ‘First Gate’ (Zech. xiv. 10), where both names occur, 












































4 thereof. And next unto them repaired Melatiah 


_ 


‘ 


A 


ae 


Set 


_ of the apothecaries.’ 


182 















repaired Geiads the son of Paseah “anal Mone am th 
of Besodeiah ; they laid the beams thereof, and set 
the doors dhessoe and the bolts thereof, and the b 


Gibeonite,and Jadon the Meronothite, the men of Gibeo 
and of Mizpah, which appertained to the throne of th 
8 governor beyond the river. Next unto him repaired — 
Uzziel the son of Harhaiah, goldsmiths. And next unto ~ 
ce oOo 


to the east of the Ephraim Gate. We ought to have menti 
made next of the Ephraim Gate if it were on the line of N 
miah’s wall. But it might not have needed repair, or G. A. S 
may be right in saying that this gate was built on a lower 
Cf. ‘above the gate of Ephraim,’ xii, 39, see on. 
Joiada: not the priest of that name, xii, To, 22, xiii, 28. 
Meshullam: apparently a common name, see on ver. q. — 
7. Read and render, ‘And next to them repaired Melatiah — 
the Gibeonite and Jadon the Meronothite (together with) the © 
men of Gibeon and Meronoth who belong to the dominion (ule 
of the governor of Transpotamia.’ 

Mizpah: better (with Bertheau, Meyer, Bertholet, Lohr, &e.) x 
read ‘Meronoth,’ which makes a good parallel with (men <a 
Gibeon: Mizpah i is represented by its rulers (verses 15, 19). a 
we retain the name we must understand by it another Micpalees 
one further to the north. 

which appertained (to): since these words are implied in aug 
Hebrew the italics should be removed. es 

throne: here = ‘rule’ or ‘ dominion” as in Ps. Ixxxix. 29, 36. ; 
The representatives of Gibeon and Meronoth (?Mizpah) were 
under no obligation to help in the work as they were under the 
jurisdiction of the Persian satrap of Transpotamia. Their 
_ generous offer of service was therefore all the more deserving 
of mention, 

_ Another interpretation given to these words is that those named — 

repaired as far as that part of the wall in or near which the 
- Persian satrap had a residence. But we do not elsewhere find * 
the remotest reference to such a residence, though Schick was of © 
opinion that in his digging he came upon the remains ofone& 
8. (next unto) him: see on v. 2, | 

goldsmiths : read, ‘one of the goldsmiths,’ prefixing ben 

~ (=son, then ‘one of’ ). Cf. the next clause ‘one (lit. ‘son”) 


1 See ZDPV. 1885, 260 f, 





>. ~ 


_ NEHEMIAH 3. 9-11. N 183 





_ him repaired Hananiah one of the “apothecaries, and they 
fortified Jerusalem even unto the broad wall. And next 9 
"unto them repaired Rephaiah the son of Hur, the ruler. 

of half the district of Jerusalem. And next unto them to 

repaired Jedaiah the son of Harumaph, even over against 
his house. And next unto him repaired Hattush the son 
of Hashabneiah. Malchijah the son of Harim, and 1 

‘Hasshub the son of Pahath-moab, repaired another por- 
= ~ © Or, perfumers > Or, deft 


apothecaries: lit. ‘mixers’; what are meant are sellers of 
perfumes, spices, and the like, much in demand for cosmetic 
purposes in Eastern countries. We must not take the word to 
mean ‘ chemists’ in the modern sense, 
fortified: Heb. ‘left,’ which can have no meaning. The 
E.VV. imply a slight change in the text (p“az%eu for ya‘az®bu), 
which must be accepted. Many futile attempts have been made to 
retain the M. T. and give it a passable meaning. 
the broad wall: this lay, according to xii. 38f., between the 
Tower of the Furnaces (see on ver. 11) and the Ephraim Gate. 
Why was the wall broader in this part? No one knows, 
Perhaps owing to the lie of the land (Stade) or because here 
the first and second walls overlapped (G. A. Smith?), or it might 
have been made so for strategic purposes (Ryle). 
9. district: Heb. ‘something round,’ cf. Arabic, then a 
- circuit, district. Jerusalem seems for administrative purposes to 
have been divided into halves. See verses 12, 16, 17, 18, where 
other half districts are referred to, and note’on ver. 22, 
10. (next unto) them: read ‘him’ and see on ver. 2. If we 
keep them we must understand it to refer to Rephaiah and his 
party. 
even: omit with some MSS., Syr., Luc., and many editors, 
11. Harim: see Ezra ii. 32, 39. 
(Pahath-moab (see on Ezra ii, 6))... another portion, lit., ‘a _ 
~ second measured portion,’ the same words in verses I9, 20, 21, 
24, 27, 30: see Ezek. xlv. 3, where the same noun is translated 
‘measure.’ It is evident that in some cases the same persons 
_ repaired two portions of the wall; cf. verses 21 and 4, 27 and 5. 
- In other cases, as here, persons are said to repair a second portion 
though nothing has been said of a first portion: so, besides the 
present verse, verses I9, 20, 30. In ver. 18 we must read 
*Binnui’ as in ver. 24 for ‘ Bavvai.’ In all the other cases verses 
“or portions of verses describing the repair by the same workers of 
a first part have dropped out. 

























3 12 tion, and the tower of the furnaces. “And next unto 
____ repaired Shallum the son of Hallohesh, the ruler of 
_ 43 the district .of Jerusalem, he and his aanphieal 


ne 
oe 


_, valley gate repaired Hanun, and the inhabitants 
__ Zanoah ; they built it, and set up the doors thereof, the 

bolts thereof, and the bars thereof, and a thousand cu 

__ 14 of the wall unto the dung gate. And the dung gate 

paired Malchijah the son of Rechab, the ruler of 

district of Beth-haccherem ; he built it,and set up the de 





“ie, and the tower, &c.: read (with LXX), ‘even as far as #] 
see Tower,’ &c. 
serene tower of the furnaces (or ‘ ovens’): Schick identifies it 
ne the David Tower (e/-Qal'a) near the Jaffa Gate. It was certz 
somewhere on the wall line between the Jaffa and Valley 
probably near the south-west corner of the modern city 
may have had its name from the fact that it joined on to 
Baker's street (or Bazaar?) of Jer. xxxvii. 2. Some think it 
___ the tower built by Uzziah on the Corner Gate (2 Chron. xxvi, 
but it was more to the west than that. ~ 
12. half the district: see on ver. 9, 
he and his daughters: render ‘it (the half district) saat 
dependent places’ (villages, towns, and cities): see xi. 25 
where Heb. ‘daughters’ is rendered in the E.VV. ‘towns 
' accordance with Heb. idiom. This form of expression meets 
very frequently in the Priestly Document. } 


AY 13 f. Southern Wall and Gates. 
. 13. valley gate: see on ii. 13. a 
Zanoah: about a dozen miles due west of Jerusalem, now 
"called Zanua. See xi, go and Joshua xi. 34. 3 
j bolts: see on ver. 3. 
antes a thousand cubits: how could the same batch of worke 
i repair the gate and more than the third of a mile of wall? Perh 
the number engaged was large, or the needful repairs in the wall 
were few and slight (see on ver. 6); or it may be that the text 
is defective, other names having fallen out. 
14. dung gate: see on ii. 13. 

Beth-haccherem : better Beth-hakkerem = ‘place of the vine 
yard’: see Jer, vi. x, Usually identified with the Frank Mou 

_ | (Jebel Furudis), a little to the south-east of Bethlehem. 
+ he built it: Heb. ‘he would build it,’ which is intolerabl le 





Caio, Oa 





* Paton (of. ery, che Say identifies the site with that of Maudslay’s s 


pe 


a - < ” tg, - 
ent ode - 


NEHEMIAH 3, 15,16. N 185 





_ ‘thereof, the bolts thereof, and the bars thereof. And the 15 
' fountain gate repaired Shallun the son of Colhozeh, the 

: ruler of the district of Mizpah ; he built it, and covered 

it, and set up the doors thereof, the bolts thereof, and the 

bars thereof, and the wall of the pool of 2Shelah by 

" the king’s garden, even unto the stairs that go down 


from the city of David. After him repaired Nehemiah 
® In-Isa. viii. 6, Shiloah. 


» read (with Zuc., LXX) ‘he’ (i.e. Malchijah) ‘and his sons’ (re- 
paired), and add (as Luc., LXX, cf. ver. 15) ‘and they covered it.’ 
_ . 15-27. The South-east Wall and Gates. 
¥ 15. fountain gate: see onii. 14. 
"4 the district (see on ver. 9} of Mizpah: distinct from the city 
of that name (see ver. 19). But Meyer and Bertholet simplify and 
perhaps (as they claim) restore the text in verses 15 and Ig, reading, 
_ ver. 15 ‘Shallum... the ruler of half the district of Mizpah. 19 Ezer 
. . . the ruler of half the district of Mizpah.’ The two parts of the 
district of Mizpah are then represented. There are no external 
» authorities for these changes, as the corruption, if real, is too old. 
pool of Shelah: this is no doubt the modern Birket-es- 
~ Silwan into which the fresh waters of the Virgin’s Spring (the 
Gihon of 1 Kings i. 33, &c.), after passing through the celebrated 
tunnel, empty themselves. The name Shelakh (‘sent,’ or ‘what 
is sent’?) is identical with the Shiloakh of Isa. viii. 6 and the 
‘Siloam of John ix. 7. It must have laid within the walls so as to __ 
_be beyond the reach of invaders}. Ryle identifies this pool with 
the modern Birket-el-Hamra, a little to the south of the above site. 
the king’s garden: see 2 Kings xxv. 4; Jer. xxxix. 4, li. 7. 
It lay probably within the walls (because too precious to be 
outside) near the mouth of the Tyropoeon. 
stairs, &c.: steps on the rock leading down from the Ophei 
(Sion) fortress to the pool. 
the city of David: primarily the ‘ stronghold of Zion’ taken 
by David from the Jebusites (2 Sam. v. 6 ff.) which became the 
citadel of Jerusalem. It was situate on the southern slope of 
Ophel, and therefore a little to the south of the area covered 
by the complex of Temple buildings, see DB. ‘Temple,’ fig. 1. 
_ Then the phrase came to denote, as here, that part of Jerusalem 
which was built close to the Temple and royal palace, though 
never in the O. T. is it used for the whole city 2. 


¥ See 2 Chron. xxxii. 3 f.; G.A.Smith, Ferus. i. 86. 
2 G. A. Smith, Ferus.i. 154, and Psalms, vol. ii (Century Bible), 
368: ff. 


~ 


6 


Lal 


ae oe 












186 NEHEMIAH 3. 17-6 a 


the son of Azbuk, the ruler of half tha "aise OF 
Beth-zur, unto the place over against the sepulchres of 
David, and unto the pool that was made, and unto the > 
17 house of the mighty men. After him repaired the Lev- ~ 
ites, Rehum the son of Bani. Next unto him repaired — 
Hashabiah, the ruler of half the district of Keilah, for his ~ 
18 district. After him repaired their brethren, Bavvai the ~ 
son of Henadad, the ruler of half the district of Keilah. 
19 And next to him repaired Ezer the son of Jeshua, the | 
ruler of Mizpah, another portion, over against the going 
20 up to the armoury at the turning of tHe wall. After him : 


‘16. half the district of Beth-zur: see ver. 17 and on ver. S5 

for other districts thus divided. “ 

Beth-zur = the modern Bethsur, about a dozen miles to the 
south of Jerusalem. See Joshua xv. 58; 2 Chron. xi. 7. 

sepulchres of David: see 2 Chron. xxxii, 33 (burial-place of , 
Hezekiah). Perhaps this royal cemetery was situate south of the 
modern St. Stephen’s Gate where there is now a Moslem necro- 
polis. This would hardly disagree with 1 Kings ii. 10, 

pool . . . made: i.e. an artificial not a natural pool, the 
language suggesting that it was a newly made one. Most recent 
authorities think the reference is to the pool of Hezekiah oe a 
Isa. xxii. 9-11). 

the house of the mighty men (= warriors) : probabl 
what is meant is the site (with ruins?) of the royal barracks 
originally by David (see 2 Sam. xvi. 16, xxxiii. 8). y 

17. the Levites: only one is mentioned ; possibly some names. 

have dropped out, or the one mentioned may represent a clan, 

Bani: see ix. 4. 

Hashabiah : see Ezra viii. 19, 24 (a different person). 

half the district, &c.: see on verses 15, 16. 

Keilah = the modern Kila, some sixteen miles south-south- 
east of Jerusalem; so Tobler and most: see Joshua xv. 44; 1 Sam. 
“xxiii, rf.; 1 Chron. iv. 19. Mihlau denies the identification on 
the ground that the modern town is on the lowlands while Keilah ~ 

must have been among the mountains of Judah. 
18. their brethren: i.e. the kinsmen of the Hashabiah clam 
who took under their care the other half of the district of Keilah. 
Bavvai: read (with LXX) Binnui, as in ver. 24; ef. x. 10; 
See on ver. If. “a 
19. Ezer ... Mizpah: see on ver. 15. 
another portion: the clause telling of Ezer’s first 











_ NEHEMIAH Sian YO 187 





Se Berach the son of * Zabbai earnestly repaired another por- 
tion, from the turning of ¢he wal/ unto the door of the 
' house of Eliashib the high priest. After him repaired 21 
_ Meremoth the son of Uriah the son of Hakkoz another 
portion, from the door of the house of Eliashib even to 
the end of the house of Eliashib. And after him repaired 22 
 the-priests, the men of the » Plain. After ¢them repaired 2: ~ 
Benjamin and Hasshub over against their house. After 


'-€them repaired Azariah the son of Maaseiah the son of_ 
® Another reading is, Zaccat, ” Or, Circutt © Heb. him. 








has fallen out; where so many names are concerned the wonder 
is that the text has been as well preserved as it is : see on ver. II, 
_ ~armoury: Heb. ‘arms,’ ‘weapons,’ then, it is generally 
assumed (though without analogy or proof), ‘the place where they 
are kept,’ ‘arsenal.’ We might render quite literally ‘over against 
~ where one goes up to the arms’ (i.e. where they are kept). 
the turning: see 2 Chron. xxvi. 9. What is meant is a part 
’ of the wall that bends inwards; so verses 20, 24f. It is the 
antithesis of ‘the corner’ (=a bend outwards) in ver. 24. 
20. Zabbai: so LXX and ket, cf. Ezra x. 28; Ar., Syr., Vulg., - 
_ and gr read ‘Zaccai,’ cf. Ezra ii. 9. In the Hebrew the difference 
— is hardly perceptible. 
earnestly: omit (with LXX and Ar.), The Hebrew word 
is simply a dittograph of the following verb (‘ repaired’), which in 
Hebrew resembles it closely. Luc., Vulg. read, ‘towards the | 
mountain,’ making a slight change in the text. The Syr. reads 
another verb (‘he took’). 
another portion ‘he first has in this case also been omitted; 
~ See on ver, II. 
turning: See on ver. I9. 
21. Meremoth ... another portion: see ver. 4, where the 
first portion is mentioned (cf. Ezra viii. 53). 
from the door . . . to the end of the house of Eliashib (see on 
" ver. 1), whence it may be concluded that the high-priest’s house 
was along the line of wall, and that it was of considerable extent. 
The text and meaning are clear enough, notwithstanding the 
difficulties which Ryssel and Siegfried see or, rather, create. 
22. Plain: Heb. (kikkar for kirkar)=‘what is round.’ Then 
‘a portion of land,’ ‘a district.’ It is the technical term for the 
low-lying district ‘about the Jordan, now called ‘The Ghor’ (see 
- Gen. xix. 17, &c. ; ef. Mal. iii. 5). 
-- 23. (After) them: Heb. ‘him,’ see on ver. 2. Perhaps the 
name and work ofone man were described in a lost clause. 


leWar 4 lm Vad g 


ant, tet et ee 
188 NEHEMIAH 



























*- 24 Ananiah beside his own house. After him repair 
Binnui the son of Henadad another portion, from tht 
house of Azariah unto the turning of the wa//, and 
: 35 the corner. Palal the son of Uzai repaired over aga 
_the turning of the wa//, and * the tower that standeth 
from the upper house of the king, which is by the cou 
of the guard. After him > Pedaiah the son of Parosh 
26 repaired. (Now the Nethinim dwelt in sees unto t He 


® Or, the upper tower .. . from the house of the king 
» Or, Pedaiah the son of Parosh (now . .. Ophel) repaired unio ve : 


24. Binnui... another portion: see on ver. 18. 
turning... corner: see on ver. I9. 
25. Translate : ‘(After him repaired) Palal... overagainstthe 
» bend (inwards) (of the wall) and (over against) the upper towei 
that stands out from the royal palace (lit. king’s house) which 
(tower) is towards (=in the direction of) the Guard Court.” toa 
The first three words of the above (which are in brackets) must : 
be restored : they are necessary for the sense, and are in harmony = 
with the usual formulae in this chapter. iy 
turning: see on ver. Io. 
? upper: this word belongs to tower (as in LXX, Vulg.) not 
. to house (as Syr., Luc., and E.VV.), though the Hebrew permi 

either. There had been many towers, but (as far as we kno 
only one royal residence. , 
that standeth out, &c.: this upper tower, instead of co- 
inciding with the wall as was usual, was built against the wall on 
the outside. ia 
_ court of the guard, or ‘guard court’: a part of the palace 4 
area in which were kept prisoners whose offences were not serious 
enough to justify their being thrust into the dungeon (see on ver. — 
gt and xii. 39). They could have mutual intercourse and receive 
visits from their friends (see Jer. xxxii. 2, and Driver’s note). — 
The part of the wall to which the ‘upper tower’ was attached _ 
formed probably one side of this court, and was accordingly 
‘towards’ the latter. For other projecting towers see ver. 26f. 
After him Pedaiah: in the Hebrew no verb occurs, show- 

_ ing the corruptness of the text, Probably ver, 26% (to phe) 
__ belongs to the close of ver. 27. We should then render, ‘Ane a 
him Pedaiah . . . repaired [26°] unto the place,’ &c. 
26. Ophel: see on ver. 27. " 
water gate: see on Ezrax. 9. We know that it was on the 



















wer # that Seandleth iow After Ein the Tekoites repaired 
other portion, over against the great tower that standeth 
t, and unto the wall of Ophel. Above the horse gate 28 
repaired the priests, ris one over against his own house. 





eceiving a large number of people pay viii. 1,3, 16). Siegfried 
ind G, A. Smith ' accept the Talmudic tradition that it was a city 
te on the line of the eastern wall, Wiis in Nehemiah’ s accounts. ~ 


them (in this chapter), and of bei dedication (xii. 27 ff.), 
thing is said of the gate except here. It had its name probably 
ecause it opened upon the path which conducted to Gihon (=the 
rgin’s Spring)—such is the old tradition. 
Bertholet (7 /oc.) argues from viii. 1, 3, 16 that there must — 
_ have been a space between the water gate and the city walls— ~~ 
‘inside the latter. ‘ (The water gate) towards the east’ he explains + ce 
as =‘ to the east of the wall that was now being repaired.’ Perhaps 
here was a water gate in some other part of the wall. In any 
ase the present gate was on the east, though it hardly seemed ~ 
Mecessary to say that, as it is of the eastern wall that Nehemiah 
now writing. See on Ezra x. 9. at 
_ the tower, &c.: the same tower as that similarly described _ 
in ver. 25. This tower marked the terminus ad quem for Palal, 
and the ferminus a quo for Pedaiah. BOY ts 
_ 27. Tekoites . . . another portion: see on ver. 5: 3 
‘i Gphel (lit.‘a swelling’): the hillcontinuing the Temple Hillon 
~ the south-west. When mentioned in pre-exilic literature (2 Kings aE 
. 24; Isa, xxx. 14; Micah iv. 8), the word is probably an inter- ~ — 
ation. On the other hand, later writers Enema Chronicles) ; 
ing a fondness for ‘ Ophel, ’ avoid ‘Sion,’ suggesting, what abun- 
dant other evidence makes clear, that Sion and Ophel were both 
ames for the same plot of ground. Cf. the probable meaning of 
Sion,’ ‘the summit of a mountain,’ and of ‘ Ophel,’ ‘swelling ?.? 
‘he name Sion came to denote the fortress captured by David from 
the Jebusites, and then the whole area on which the complex of 
"royal and Temple buildings were placed :. see G. A. Smith, Jerus. 
144 ff., 152 ff., and cf. ‘Psalms’ vol. ii, p. 368 ff. (Century Bible). 
28-32. The North-east Wail. Completion. 
8. horse gate: see 2 Kings xi. 16; 2 Chron. xxiii. 15; Jer. 
i. 40. From the last passage it may be fairly inferred that 
is gate stood at the eastern extremity of Jerusalem. It was 


Ferus. i. 86. 
' Prof. Sayce thinks that Ophel was the ridge of Zion that was 


‘cut away By the Maccabees. 
A) 





































Ay 








_ 29 After *them repaired Zadok the son nof ‘Tomere ove 


30 son of Shecaniah, the keeper of the east gate. After h 














196 NEHEMIAH 3. 


his own house. And after him repaired Shemaiah th 
Aer 


repaired Hananiah the son of Shelemiah, and Hanun 

sixth son of Zalaph, another portion. After him repa 

_ Meshullam the son of Berechiah over against his cham! 
After him repaired Malchijah one of the goldsmiths 

the house of the Nethinim, and of the merchants, o 

® Heb. him. ane 


— oe 
situated a little to the south of the modern Golden Gate and over-— 
looked the Wady Kidron. It was probably so called because the 
king's horses used to be led through it to the stables (see Joseph. — 
Antiq. ix. 7, 3). Furrer is hardly right in saying that this gate — 
received its name from the horses used in sun worship (see 
2 Kings xxiii. 11), as a name with such an origin would hz 
been long since abandoned. 
the priests: it was natural for these to see to the repal ing 
_ of the parts of the wall that were contiguous to their own d 


_ 


3 


in the sacred enclosure. y “er 
29. Zadok: see Ezra ii. 37. ack 
Shemaiah: see 1 Chron. xxvi. 6. ak: 


east gate: not the ‘water gate,’ or this name would have ~ 
been given it here as in ver. 26. Probably it is a Temple gate. 
Shemaiah seems to have been a Levite (see Ezek. xliv. rr). 
30. Hanun... another portion: see ver. 13. is 
the sixth son, &c.: this description is absent from ver. 13, 
and, besides, it is unparalleled in this list. Guthe and Ber- 
‘ tholet are, therefore, probably right in seeing in the Hebrew" 
_ words a corruption of the name of the place whence Hanun came. 
Meshullam: probably the words ‘a second portion’ have — 
by haplography fallen out (see ver. 4, where he is mentioned as 
having repaired a portion of the north wall). 
chamber: the Heb. word mishkah occurs also in xii. 440 
xiii. 7. It is an allied form of the word (Jishkah) so translated in — 
Ezra viii. 29 and x. 6 (see on both). ats 
31. goldsmiths : Heb. ‘ goldsmith’ (singular), But the English 
translators rightly appended the Heb. m, making it plural. — 
Wethinim : temple servants (see p. 63 f-). 
merchants: i.e, such as trafficked in articles connected with 
the Temple worship, animals for sacrifice, incense, garments, &e. 
(see Matt. xxi. 12; Jobn i ii.14). They and the Nethinim seem to 
have occupied a room in the Temple area between them, not for 
sleeping in, but for performing their duties in the day time. i= 











’ ease We goa i 
"NEHEMIAH Sek “ror 





i against the gate of Merimphicad, and to the ®ascent of the) 


Sa 


‘corner. And between the “ascent of the corner and the 32 


sheep gate repaired the goldsmiths and the merchants. 


But it came to pass that, when Sanballat heard that we 4: 


_ builded the wall, he was wroth, and took great indigna- 
tion, and mocked the Jews. And he spake before his 2 


the north (see'xii. 39). 


brethren and the army of Samaria, and said, What do 
* Or, upper chamber 





(the gate of) Mammiiphend : lit. ‘place of visitation’ or of 
fpunishinent’; render ‘ prison ° (see Ezek. xliii. 21, where ‘ the 
appointed place of the house’ (E.VV.) is (ham) ‘ miphkad of the 
house’). Probably the word in the present verse stands for a 
building some distance from (=over against) the wall where ordi- 
nary prisoners were shut up. It cannot (with Schultz) be identi- 
fied with the guard court of ver. 25 (see on) since it is too far to 


ascent of \e corner: Heb, ‘the upper (part or chamber) 


of the corner.’ rhaps a tower ina wall corner or angle bulging 
out and used ‘ecréation or as a place of observation. \ 
32. sher : see on ver.t. The whole circuit of the walls 
has been cribed. 
go’ s: here, according to Perles, ‘money-changers’ 
- (see ver. e 
men : see on ver. 31. These two classes must have 
had some. lal connexion with the Temple and its requirements, 
_ and hence e appropriately they repair parts of the wall near the 
Sacred enc ie 
IV, (Heb.i 93-38). Opposition oF THE SAMARITAN PARTY 


3 


; 


AND TH» 4MEANS USED BY NEHEMIAH TO NEUTRALIZE IT. 


1-3. Taunts of Sanballat and Tobiah (see on ii. 10). 

1. that we builded: better, ‘that we were building,’ or with 
‘Siegfried (as the Heb, permits), ‘that we were about to build.’ But 
See ver. 6. 


2. his brethren: in a loose) sense ‘his associates’ (see ver. 3 


' mocked: see ver. 2f. 


and ii. 10). 

the army of Samavria,: hardly a contingent of the Persian 
army (Rawlinson), but’ a body of ‘irregulars’ belonging to 
Samaria and the parts around, sworn to defend the Persian 
authority in all eme:rgencies (see on ver. 7). 


ar What do, &.: better, ‘What are these feeble Jews about 


’ 


to do?” 
(0) 


192 ai 4 te N- 










sacrifice? will they make an end in a ay? will 
revive the stones out of the heaps of rubbish, seeing ' 
3are burned? Now Tobiah the Ammonite was by 
and he said, Even that which they build, if a > fox go 
4 he shall break down their stone wall. Hear, O our 
for we are raat ON and turn back their reproach u 


® Or, will they oe to themselves aught? Or, will men let th 
alone ? > Or, jackal 


will they fortify themselves? The Hebrew ‘see R.V 
yields no sense. Change the Heb. /ahem (‘ for,’ ‘ to t hemsel 
to Pelohim, and we get excellent Hebrew and sense, ‘ Will 
leave (resign) (the matter) to God?’ For the thougtit see 2 Kil 
xviii. 30, 32, 35. A similar mistake in the Heb. te xt (one 
made) occurs in 1 Sam. iii. 13, and Hos, xiii. 2. ~~ 

an end: i. e. of the rebuilding. 


3. A parenthesis, as v. 19, vi. 9, 14. , 3 % 4 
that which they build, if a fox, &c.: the which ¢ 
Jews may build will be so fragile chat one of th vith ocd 
the ruined walls are infested (Ps. Ixiii. ro; Li. " Be 
able to level these new walls to the ground. el & 
fox: the Heb. word ‘is properly so rendered aown by * 


Arabic, Assyrian, and Persian cognates. Some rena. al, butthe — 
Arabic and Aramaic word for the latter animal can | oved to be © 
philologically different from the Hebrew word (shu‘a this verse. 
Of course some things predicated of the fox apply tc jackal, : 
the word for fox retains itsownsense hereandelsewl €& ere 
4£. One of Nehemiah’s ejaculatory prayers: see fo. thers v. 19, 
vi. 6, 14, xili. 14, 22, 29. oe 
The vindictive spirit is characteristac of the age. Be 
arising from zeal for Yahweh and His cause, as underst 
is itself reprehensible. Cf. the Vind'ictive Psalms, and see Introd. 
to Ps. cix (Century Bible). 
4. we are despised: add one letter and read (with Luc. 
LXX) ‘we are an object of contet pt. . 
give... spoiling: render, ‘.make them a spoil’; see Ezra 
ix. 7. The Heb. word lizeah is intencled probably as a kind of pun | 
on the word for ‘ object of contempt’ (size above). ‘ They have 
made us a buzah, make thou them a bizesah,' 
in-a land of captivity : may they, in a foreign hostile land, 
have the same bitter experience which our nation~ passed : 
in Babylon. =. 
ile 


ore ae 







¥ 


= -_ NEHEMIAH 4 5-8, N igatiece 





‘captivity: and cover not their iniquity, and let not their 5 
sin be blotted out from before thee: for they have pro- 
_ voked //ee to anger before the builders. So we built the 6 
_ wall ; and all the wall was joined together unto half che 
_ height thereof: for the people had a mind to work. ; 
_*But it came to pass that, when Sanballat,and Tobiah, 7 _ 
and the Arabians, and the Ammonites, and the Ashdod- 
ites, heard that » the repairing of the walls of Jerusalem — 
went forward, avd that the breaches began to be stopped, 
then they were very wroth; and they conspired all of 8 
# [Ch. iv. r in Heb.] > Heb. healing went up upon the walls. 


_ 5. cover not; &c.: see Ps, Ixxxv. 2. 
let not their sin be blotted out: see Ps. cix. 14. 

_ they have provoked...to anger: the object (Yahweh) 

~ understood, as in Ps. cvi. 29; Hos. xii. 15. - 
before the builders: perhaps Sanballat and his friends had 
tried to dissuade the builders from their task. 

6. Progress of the work. 

we built: better, ‘we continued to build’ (i.e. rebuild): see 
Ezra v. 2. 

unto half: the height being understood is rightly supplied 
by the E.VV. But so interpreted we must not regard ch. ii as im- 
plying the completion of the walls, or must we (with Siegfried) 
regard the present clause asa gloss? 

7{. Conspiracy to stop the work. 

7. Sanballat: see on ii. ro. = 
Arabians (Arabs) ... Ammonites: i.e. such of these 
_ people as belonged to the entourage of Geshem (see on ii. 9), ~ 

Tobiah (see on ii. 10). 
: and the Ashdodites: Guthe (with LXX) omits this clause 
_ as the Ashdodites are nowhere else mentioned in this connexion. 
_ Yet all the other versions have the words, including Luc, and 
some MSS. of the LXX. 
the repairing, &c. ; the Hebrew word is used of the healing 
of a wound by the growing of new instead of the old diseased 
flesh. It is always in the O.T. used figuratively: see Isa. viii. 8 ; 
_ Jér. viii. 22 (of the restoration of Israel), and 2 Chron. xxiv. 13 (of 
the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem, as here). 
went forward: lit. ‘went up,’ following out the figure—the new 
healthy flesh grew up instead of the old. So in the above passages 
' except in that from Isaiah, where theverb = ‘to sprout up’ (samakh). 
breaches: see vi. I. very wroth: see ver. I. 


O02 





i 


* >} 









194 "NEHEMIAH 4. 9-12, 


them together to come and fight against Je ‘usalem, 
9 to cause confusion therein. But we made our pray. 
unto our God, and set a watch against them day and — 
10 night, because of them. And Judah said, The strength 
of the bearers of burdens is decayed, and there is much 
rubbish ; so that we are not able to build the wall. And — 
our adversaries said, They shall not know, neither see, - 
till we come into the midst of them, and slay them, and ’ 
12 cause the work to cease. And it came to pass that, when ~ 
the Jews which dwelt by them came, they said unto us 
ten times *from all places, Ye must return unto us. ~ 
® Or, From all places whence ye shall return they will betpon us 


I 


a 

8. conspired: lit. ‘banded (themselves) together,’ the verb 
which (in the passive) occurs in ver. 6 (‘ was joined ). It is com- 

monly used of secret, treacherous consultations. cee 
to cause confusion=to bring about a panic. The noun 
occurs besides in Isa. xxxii. 6 only. 4 


9-23. Nehemtah's prayer and precautions. 
9. set a watch= posted sentinels : see vii. 3. 
because of them: Heb. ‘in front of them.’ The sentinels 
were set towards the direction whence the enemy was expected ~ 
to advance. as 
10. Judah: the country for the people, as often in the O. T.5 
cf. Moab, Edom, Israel; and cf. ‘we’ further on in the verse. 2 
rubbish: see ver. 2: until this was cleared away the walls ~ 

could not be completed. x 

ll. adversaries: the Hebrew word (sar) denotes ‘strictly 
those who injure,’ and has reference to what they do. The word — 
translated ‘enemies’ in ver. 15 (Heb. ’Oyeb) is subjective in 4 
its connotation and suggests the unkind feelings harboured, asthe 
other word the harm done. :! ee. 
said: the verb often =‘ to say inwardly,’ and so ‘to purpose,” : 


Pe os 
’ «* 


Perhaps Nehemiah got wind of an actual conversation of the kind. 
cause the work to cease: the same verb in Dan. ix. 27 (of | 
sacrifice) in the same sense, and in 2 Chron. xvi. § (end) in 
a somewhat different sense. 
12. (the Jews which dwelt) by them: near their foes, the 
Samaritans and their allies. ; 
ten times: i.e. ‘ many times,’ as in Gen. xxxi. 41. i 
from all places, &c.: the Hebrew is scarcely intelli 
etter amend with Bertholet and read as follows; * From he — 












Jae§ v ve. 
as Pe ” 





4 heir ianailies with their pyar their spears, and their — 


4 bows. And I looked, and rose up, and said unto the 
nobles, and to the ® rulers, and to the rest of the people, 
_ Be not ye afraid of them: remember the Lord, which is 
‘great and terrible, and fight for your brethren, your sons 
_ and your daughters, your wives and your houses. Andit 
ag ® Or, deputies 








_ places where they (the enemy) dwell’ (so Syr., the Hebrew con- 
sonantal text agreeing) ‘ they are coming up’ (so Luc., LXX, Vulg., 
Guthe) ‘against us.’ That is, the Jews who have come from their 
country homes to take part in the work of rebuilding say over and 

~ over, ‘from all parts as we came along we saw our “foes marching 
up against us.’ It was in consequence of this intelligence that 
_ Nehemiah promptly set about the measures detailed in verses 13 ff. 


Ree ie 








at restoration and explanation the following seems to the present 
writer the best—it is in part his own: ‘And I set in the low 
places of the space behind the wall (which wall was) a great 
defence: yea, I set the people according to their clans,’ &c. 


‘ - in the lowest parts: Bertheau, Siegfried, &c., making 


13. The text is almost hopelessly corrupt. Of many attempts © 


a slight change in the Hebrew, read ‘catapults,’ the word in — 


2 Chron. xxvi. 15. 

aM open places: the (one) Hebrew word occurs besides only 
_ in Ezek. xxiv. 7 f. and xxvi. 4,14 with the noun ‘rock’ in the 
‘sense ‘a bare,’ lit. ‘sunburnt place’ on a rock. This does not 
make sense here. It is better to read the Hebrew word for 
_ ‘shadows’ (selalim for sekhikhim, much more alike in the Hebrew 
‘consonant text) and to understand in the sense ‘defences,’ then 
~ (plural of intensity) ‘strong defence.’ The noun has this sense 
in Isa. xlviii. 45 (of a wall); Num. xiv. 9 (of Yahweh); Ps. xci. 1. 
The preposition before the noun is the beth essentiae which serves 

to introduce the predicate (see G. K. 119, i). 
spears: used for thrusting at an enemy when near enough. 


A os 








The bows were for attacking those at a distance, the swords for 


rc; hand-to-hand fights. 

_ 14. I looked, and rose up: an extraordinary combination of 
words in this connexion. Read with Siegfried (?), Bertholet, and 
Kent, ‘And I saw their fear,’ changing one Hebrew word, Cf, 
Be not afraid. 

-—s mobiles... rulers: see on ii. 16. 

_— great and terrible: see i. 5 and ix. 32, 






























*y, 







unto us, and God had brought their counsel to noug 
We returned all of us to the wall, every one unto his wor 
16 ‘And it came to pass from that time forth, that half of ; 
- servants wrought in the work, and half of them held 
__Spears, the shields, and the bows and the coats of mail; 
17 and the rulers were behind @all the house of Judah. They ~ 
® Or, all the house of Judah that builded the wall. And they that &c. oe 
15. enemies: see on ver. II, 
(that) it (was known) = their purpose to march upon tbe e. 
city. This word should be italicized, as it is not inthe M.T. 
God had brought, &c.: Nehemiah had but used the means ; 
the result was God’s doing. 
counsel: common in the O.T. in the sense of ‘schem 
‘plan’ (see Ezra iv. 5 Isa. xxix. 15, xxx. 1, &c.). We have t 7 
_ Same phrase as here ‘to bring to nought,’ lit. to break ‘a plan,’ 
Ezra iv. 5; 2 Sam. xv. 34, &c. ane 
we returned, &c.: no longer fearing an immediate attac 
they resumed their work, though (verses 15 ff.) with due red 
* tothe real danger still existing. " 
16. my servants: the select body chosen by Nehemiah, o: 
allotted him as an army of defence, not the whole of the govern: | 
subjects (Judah) : see verses 17, 23, v. 10, 16, Xili. 19. ; : 
Of the above, half gave themselves to work (but even those | fe 
“were armed, see ver. 17), the other half to defence. : 
held the spears: the E.VV. here, as often (see on Ezra Ce ’ 
16), translate from a corrected text. The M.T. is unidiomatic. 
shields: the Hebrew noun here (sing. magén) stands for ~ 
the small shield carried by warriors along with spears, &e. » 
Another word frequently translated ‘ shield’ (sinnah) denotes 
that is larger, requiring sometimes at least another to carry it (see Re 
1 Sam. xvii. 7). The latter weighed about four times as much as the 
former: see Skinner on r Kings x. 16f. (Century Bible). Both words — ' 
come together in Jer. xlvi. 3 ; Ezek. xxiii. 24, &c. (buckler (sagen) — 
and shield). Two other words (shelet, see Jer. li, 11, and kidon, 
Job xxxix, 23, R.V. javelin) are wrongly translated ‘shield.’ 
coats of mail: leather coats covered with thin plates of 
bronze (see 1 Sam. xvii. 4). These are portrayed plentifully on — 
the Assyrian and Egyptian monuments of the ninth century B. c 7 
and later. During the winter of 1908-9 Petrie found portions pen 
some of them on the site of the palace of Apries (reigned circa 
590-570 B. c.) at Memphis. rigs 
rulers : the Hebrew word as in ix. 9 (see on), not thay in 2 
ver, I9 (see on ii, 16). ‘ 






« 


pad oe 





: NEHEMIAH a a 18-22, N aE 197 
that builded the wall and they that bare burdens lade 
‘themselves, every one with one of his hands wrought in 
ee work, and with the other held his weapon ; and the 18 
_ builders, every one had his sword girded by his side, and 
_ so builded. And he that sounded the trumpet was by me. _ 
gy I said unto the nobles, and to the * rulers and to the tg 
"rest of the people, The work is great and large, and we are 
separated upon the wall, one far from another: in what 20 
~ place soever ye hear the sound of the trumpet, resort ye 
thither unto us; our God shall fight for us. So wear 
wrought in the work: and half of them held the spears — 
from the rising of the morning till the stars appeared. 
~ Likewise at the same time said I unto the people, Let 22 - 


_ every one with his servant lodge within Jerusalem, that in 
=. ® Or, deputies 





- were behind, &c.: for the purpose of encouraging and- 
directing in the event of an attack. 
~ all the house, &c.: join on to the first five words in ver. 17, 
“as in the R.Vm.: ‘All the house of Judah that builded the wall 
(a7) and they that,’ &c. 

17. laded themselves: read, with very little alteration in 
the Hebrew, ‘were armed.’ So Ryssel (in Kautzsch, Heilige 
Schrift}, Guthe, &c.: cf. what follows. ; 

18. he that sounded the trumpet: to give an alarm in case 
of an attack. 

-- 29. nobles... rulers: see on ii. 16. b- 
_ 21. The interval between sunrise and sunset varies in Palestine. 
_ between fourteen hours (in summer) and ten (in winter). 
appeared: lit. ‘came out.” In Hebrew the idiom for sun- 
rise is ‘to come out’ (from his night chamber ?), that for sunset 
_ being ‘ to enter in’ (i. e. to return to his night chamber ?). These 
- Modes of expression have, it would appear, a mythological origin. 
22. Let every one with his servant lodge, &c.: i.e. the 
_inaster builders and those who helped. Perhaps by the latter we 
_ are to understand the burden-bearers (see ver. 17), 1. e. those who 
_ carried the building materials. Many men of both classes had 

“country homes, to which they seem te have returned of nights. 

Nehemiah would have them spend the nights at Jerusalem for the 

security of the latter and for their own safety, for the enemy was 

now on the alert (see on ver. 12}. But it would have gone hard 
with them if the same men had to work in the daytime and watch 














t Poe 


ase : 


Nehemiah by the king of Persia when he left fepalexcahen C 


_oné with his weapon in his hand.’ The M, T. does not perm 























* The text is probably faulty. 


during the night. It must be therefore that the watching w 
done by relays, who took duty in turns. : 
23. my servants : see on ver. 16. 

men of the guard: probably the foreign soldiers allow 


ii. 9). 

every one went, &c. : the best MSS. of the LXX omit 
clause, but its sister Greek text ( Luc.) makes amends by giving 
conflate or double text, which Guthe adopts’. The M. T. makes: 
sense, for it is simply ‘ every one his weapon (missile) the wate 
though it is usually explained that every one went dressed having 
his missile to the place where nature was relieved. If 
text is retained, slightly amend the last word and render ‘e 


the rendering of Grotius : ‘ (but) every one put them (the clo 
off during his ablutions’; cf, Mark vii. 4, 8. 


REMOVAL, 


1-5. The poor complain of the extortion and oppression of the tch 

Since the work of rebuilding was a labour of love—for there is 
not a word about payment of wages—the amount of time 
energy set apart for the ordinary occupations of life must hi 
been greatly diminished. Moreover, the unsettlement in 
country districts and the risks connected with labouring and 
residence in them (see on iv. 12) must have brought about alm 
a paralysis of agricultural industry, greatly to the financial d 
advantage of landowners and labourers. One must add to” th 
causes of poverty or lessened wealth the enormous expense 6} 
materials for the building and of weaponsof defence. The well-to-do 
would in these circumstances need the money they had lent, 
whether needing it or not, would be inclined, when they found th 
interest no longer paid, to call in what was lent (generally mon 
or to demand all available pledges. 

We do not find among the Jews in Bible times any system. ‘hs 


laws or customs governing the relation of lender and borrower, is 








1 The text of Luc. may be thus translated: ‘Every one whom 
they sent (= who was sent) to the water (i. e. to fetch reaier) (weet) 
each with his weapon to the water.’ 














NP rg 





a Se 
 .NEHE 
ee iin eee 


oo there arose a great cry of the people and of their 5 


“wives against their brethren the Jews. For there were that 2 — 4 





“said, We, our sons and our daughters, are many : let us 
“ 


such, for example, as prevailed among the Babylonians in the 
time of Hammurabi (circa 2200 B.c.), though even among them 
such laws were less complete than one would gather from Stanley 
_ Cook’s book, The Laws of Moses and the Code of Hammurabi (1903)'. 
” Read asa corrective C. H. W. Johns, Babylonian and AssyrianLaws, _ 
Contracts and Letters (1904) *. Among the Hebrews, as generally 
among the Babylonians *, loans were made to the poor alone for the 
purpose of meeting special emergencies (bad crops, fire, &c.). 
Lending as aninvestment with the expectation ofa good return was 
hardly known in those times. Hence the laws which forbade the _ 
- claiming of interest are found perhaps first in the Deuteronomic 
code? (yet cf. Exod. xxii. 25, JE), but are continued inlater codes ® 
~ and reinforced in the Talmud ®. The Egyptian laws condemned the 
_ charging of interest, and so does the Quran’; and the same is 
_ true of the Bedouin of the present day if what C. M. Doughty says 
“is correct: ‘The malicious subtlety of usury is foreign to the 
brotherly dealing of the nomad tribesmen * 
But that no strict law on this matter existed among the 
_ Hebrews is abundantly proved by the present chapter and by 
parts of the O.T., in which the practice of lending at interest is 
‘condemned. Indeed, many of the humanities prescribed in the 
relation between creditor and debtor, employer and employed, 
were found at a later time to be impracticable®. See Jer. xxxiv. 
8f£, and on the whole subject consult Benzinger (Encyc. Bib., 
‘Law and Justice,’ § 16 and his later discussion in Heb. Arch. 
(1907), p. 292 ff.: cf. p. 268 ff.). See further on verses 2, 7 and ff. 
The fact that at this time there was a capitalist or rich class shows 
" that there had been a large return of exiles many years earlier, for 
the Jews left behind were poor and belonged to the least im- 
portant families. 
' G. a great cry: the same words in Exod. xii. 30. There the 
_ cause was the oppression of the Egyptians, here the oppression 
of brother Jews, which made it harder to bear. 
~ the people: i.e. for the poor, cf. vil. 5. 
their brethren the Jews: see above. 
2. We, our sons, &c.: read, ‘We must give our sons and 
_ SR es eee ee 
"1 Seep. 228 ff. 7 See p.25off. * Johns,/.c. * Deut. xxiii 19 f 
5 Lev. xxv. 36 f.; cf. Ps. xv. 5; Prov. xxviii. 8; Ezek. xviii. 7 £., 
rof., 16 f. 
' §& Baba Mesiah, 61b. 7 xxx. 38. 8 Arabia Deserta, i. 318. 
9 See the passages adduced under note 5. 






”“ 


ee 


Pe a te feat hae OP ee 


568 NEHEMIAH Be 















Rie haiiaale may eat and live. Some also | 
that said, We are mortgaging our fields, and o 


4 dearth. There were also that said, We have bo 
money for the king’s tribute fo our fields and our y: 
5 yards. Yet now our flesh is as the flesh of our brethren 
our children as their children: and, lo, we bring into 
bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants, po 
some of our daughters are brought into bondage already 
_ 
daughters in pledge,’ prefixing one Hebrew letter (‘ais) to the 
word translated ‘many’: no other change in the consonantal 
text is necessary. See ver. 3, where the same combination 


Hebrew words occurs. The participle thus restored has the _s 
force of expressing what i is to be, must be, as the same participle 7 
2 


. 


in ver. 3 ‘We must,’ &c. Meo 
anaes the Hebrews 1, as among the Babylonians”, a man col 
sell his wife and children to wipe off a debt, but they had to be ~ 
set at liberty in the seventh year’: the Babylonians lessened Frocs F 
years of bondage to three *. . 
let us get: render, ‘so that we may buy,’ &c., which cs 
Hebrew allows and the sense demands. 
3. We are mortgaging, &c.: render, ‘ We must mortgage,’ &c. , 
The verb (a participle here and as amended i in ver. 2) is the re | 
as that rendered above (see on ver. 2), § give ..% in pl 
-In both cases the meaning is the same, ‘to give as secu oe 
Property also returned to the family that originally owneds 
in the seventh, i.e. in the Sabbatic year; see on ver. 2. bs 
let us, &e. : render, ‘that we may buy corn,’ as in ver. 3. 
4. Nothing fresh appears in this verse, for it is simply a repeti-_ 
- tion in other words of what ver. 3 says, except that the purpose | 
of the loan is mentioned. Probably it is a marginal gloss on ver. 3° 
which found its way into the text as many other such glosses. 5 
have done. 
5. flesh: the word has often the meaning ‘a human being 
‘a personality’; cf. ‘all flesh,’ &c. in Gen. vi. 12, * We are w 
our rich brethren are; we have the same homan. characteristics 5 
yet our children are their slaves.’ <i, 
we bring: render, ‘we must bring,’ see on_ver. 2. al 
‘4 


me 


; 
e 
' 
f 





1 Lev. xxv. 39" 41. 2 Cook, op. cit. 229. ; 

* Exod. xxi, 2: so originally in Lev. xxv. 40, according to ie 
modern scholars. > te 

4 Hammurabi Laws, No. 117+ 


_— 









NEHEMIAH a 6-8. Nar: cote 
. neither i is it in our power to help it ; for Sifter men have > 
"our fields and our vineyards. And I was very angry when 6 
Lheard their cry and these words. Then I consulted 7 
_ with myself, and contended with the nobles and the * rulers, 
“and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one_of his 
brother. And Ihelda great assembly against them. And 8 

“Isaid unto them, We after our ability have » redeemed our 
“brethren the Jews, which were sold unto the heathen ; 
and would ye even sell your brethren, and should they hi 
soldunto us? Then held they their peace, and found 


® Or, deputies > Heb. bought. 














for other men, &c.:~we are hopelessly in their power, 
since they hold our land whence alone we might obtain the 
"money to redeem our children. Luc., LXX read, ‘the nobles’ 
" instead of other men, which last the M.T., Ar., Syr., and Vulg. 
read. The former agrees best with the phraseology of this book 
and is probably primary. The Hebrew writing of the two words 
_ is not very dissimilar. 


6-11. Nehemiah rebukes the guilty ones, and demands both 
| vestitution and reform. 
7. nobles, rulers: see on ii. 16. 
‘Ye exact usury: the same verb is used in ver. 10 by 
Nehemiah to describe what he himself and his brethren and 
servants did, but here it is accompanied by a cognate accusative 
which seems to add the idea of lending on interest not (as 
- Rawlinson) upon pledge, which was allowed; see preliminary 
_ remarks to this chapter. 
; assembly: a feminine form of the noun translated ‘con- 
_ gregation’ in ver. 13 and in Ezra ii. 64 (see on). As there is no 
_ difference of meaning, the ending having the force of our indefinite 
 afticle, the same English word (‘congregation’) ought to have 
been employed. 
__ 8. have redeemed: lit., ‘obtained by purchase,’ referring to 
; _ Jews whom on his arrival he found working off debts in the 
' service of non-Jews. 
= heathen : lit., ‘nations,’ a word which in the plural came to 
have the sense of non- -Jewish peoples and to take on an ethical 
colouring. It is often translated in the English Bible by ‘ Gentiles’ 
owing to the fact that in the Vulgate gentes is the word for the 
_ Heb. gotm (nations), though geniiles in Latin denotes strictl 
__ members of the aristocratic families; see SDB. article ‘ Nations, 





to cause of the reproach of the heathen our enemies? 


I 


I 


I 


202 NEHEMIAH 5. 






good : ought ye not to walk in the fear of our God, 


I likewise, my brethren and my servants, do lend 
money and corn on usury. I pray you, let us leave off” 
this usury. Restore, I pray you, to them, even this day, : 
their fields, their vineyards, their oliveyards, and their 
houses, also the hundredth part of the money, and of the” 
corn, the wine, and the oil, that ye exact of them. Then 

said they, We will restore them, and will require nothing _ 


= 








9. I said: so rightly gv. and all the versions; but the Hebrew i 
consonantal text (Aeth) has ‘ he said.’ ~~ 
to walk in the fear of our God = to walk, i.e. to co 
eneself as proper respect for the authority of God would dictate; — 

i.e. to keep His commandments; see Acts ix. 31 and ef. Dest 
X. I2; see on ver. 15 (‘the fear of God oS 

because of the reproach, &c.: that the reproach which earn 
enemies fasten on us of oppressing each other contrary to the ~ 


Divine law may cease, or, as many, ‘to obviate or prevent such 


a reproach.’ 
10. AndI... do lend: but without interest, see below. 
on usury: ‘at interest.’ Since, however, the Hebrew 
seems to mean ‘to lend without interest’ these words are to 
be omitted. 
11. even this day: the Hebrew phrase = ‘immediately.’ 
the hundredth part: read (inserting one Hebrew consonané), 
‘the interest’ (on the monéy, &c.). One hundredth per cent. fas 
annum would be too small, and so commentators have said ¥} 
the interest implied was paid monthly (as sometimes in ancient — 
Babylon), making it twelve per cent. per annum, about the average 
interest charged in Babylon. But nothing in the context or 
in other parts of the O.T. supports this. It is far simpler with ~ 
most modern scholars to make the slight bai. in the -— 
noticed above. 


t2f. The guilty ones promise to make amends jor the past Ea" . 
to alter their ways in the future. | 

12. We will restore, &c.: this resolution represents probably. 
the result of prolonged negotiations. The historian gives the 
bare facts only. In any case the enormous influence of the cup-— 
bearer stands out in a clear light. , 


bas sg 


“4 








pte NEE ; : : : Faia a ot ee 
a © a "54 , a7 — ie a 
"NEHEMIAH 5 5. 13, 14. oN aS, wogete 






. Fthem ; 30 will we a6, even as thou sayest. Then I 
called the priests, and took an oath of them, that they 
Betould do according to this promise. Also I shook out 13 
4 my lap, and said, So God shake out every man from his 
“house, and from his labour, that performeth not this pro- 
: mise ; even thus be he shaken out and emptied. And all 
' the congregation said, Amen, and praised the Lorp. 
And the people did according to this promise. More- r4 
over from the time that I was appointed to be their 
governor in the land of Judah, from the twentieth year 
even unto the two and thirtieth year of Artaxerxes the 
king, thai is, twelve years, I and my brethren have not 


ae 











the priests administer the oath because it was a religious 
action ; see Num. v. 19-22. : 
took an oath (of the creditors): the oath occupied a large 
' place among the Hebrews. To violate it was supposed to bring 
down the Divine malediction. Sometimes the curse implied was 
explicitly added to increase the solemnity of the act of swearing ; 
see Num. v. 21, and on the next verse. 

13. I shook out my lap: i.e. the fold in the bosom of the 
_ dress capable of serving the purposes of a pocket. 

Nehemiah’s symbolical action amounts to a curse upon any one 
who violated the oath; see Acts xviii. 6 and-above on ver. 12; 
ef. Acts xxiii. 2 ‘the Jews bound themselves under a curse.’ 
his labour: the Hebrew word denotes also (as here) the 

fruits or produce of labour. 
: be he shaken out: see Job xxxviii. 13. 
congregation: see on Ezra ii: 64 and cf. ver. 7 above. 
the people: the Jews generally carried into practice what 
the congregation had approved. 


ore. 


. 


14-19. Nehemiah's personal generosity and self-denial. 

14. By surrendering the pay to which as governor he was 
entitled Nehemiah was relieving his fellow countrymen who 
would have had to be taxed to find it. 

twentieth year... of Artaxerxes: i.e. 445 B.c. The king 
“was Artaxerxes I; see on ii. 1. 

unto the two and thirtieth year: i.e. to 433 B.c., twelve 
years. See on ii. 6 as to the great length of this period of 
absence. 

“my brethren: Nehemiah’s retinue. 


—=, — 









204 - . NEHEMIAH 5; 15,16 


15 eaten the bread of the governor. — 
* nors that were before me “were chargeable unto the | 
and took of them bread and wine, »beside forty she 
silver ; yea, even their servants bare rule over the peopl 
16 but so did not I, because of the fearof God. Yea, alsol 
dcontinued in the work of this wall, neither bought we any 
® Or, laid burdens upon > Or, at the rate of Or, afterward 
© Or, lorded over 4 Heb. held fast to, ae 


yee 








age dell - d La 


bread: here, as often in English, food, which is perhaps the | 
primary sense of the Hebrew word. In Arabic the co 
word = ‘flesh’; cf. ver. 15 ‘bread and wine’? = the whole of 
what was served at table. 

15. the former governors... before me: a redundancy, m ie 
in the manner of Nehemiah, see v. 1g ‘shake,’ ‘be shaken,’ and Co 
The first of Nehemiah’s predecessors in the governorship of the = 
Jewish post-exilic community was Zerubbabel. We know nothin 
of those intervening, though in the Sachau Papyri, i. 1, we rea’ 4 
a successor Bagohi. It is natural to infer from Nehemiah t r 
as far as he knew Zerubbabel took the full governor's pay. is 

and took of them, &c.: render, ‘for (as the price off § in 7 
Hebrew the ‘eth of price’) bread and wine daily forty shel 
of silver’ (about £5). 4 

beside: the Hebrew word (= ‘after,’ ‘afterwards’) makes. 
no suitable sense here. Read (with the Vulg. ), ‘daily,’ the form 
occurring in ver. 18 ‘for one day’ (= ‘for each day’). A glance 
at the Hebrew will show how easily a copyist could mistake one 
for the other; ‘after’ and ‘one’ are written almost alike. aye 
word lost is much like that preceding it, and was probably 
confounded with it. : 

bare rule: the Hebrew word itself (the same root as in 
Sultan, which is Arabic) =‘ to exercise power’ and so ‘torule.’ It 
may have come to have a bad meaning as ‘to lord it,’ but we 
have no other instance of the sense. Perhaps we should rea 
with the Vulg. ‘oppressed. : 

but so did not I : in Hebrew the pronoun is emphatic, ‘ but as 
for me I acted not so.’ Compare Paul’s similar claim in 1 Cor, ix. 1 

16. I continued, &c.: the Hebrew word is identical with the 
used for to repair (the wall) (see on iii. 4), but with the pre 
tion following it here (6) it=to put the hand to, lay hold of, “, 
gave myself whole-heartedly to the work of restoring the wall,” 
i.e. probably superintending the undertaking as regards acti 
building, defence, and finance. Nehemiah is not mentioned ine : 

ch. iii as undertaking any special portion of the wall. Je 
neither bought we, &c. : he was too absorbed in the main 


























2 rulers an hundred and fifty men, beside those that — 
ame unto us from among the heathen that were round — 
‘about us. Now that which was prepared for one day was 18 _ 
ie ox and six choice sheep ; also fowls were prepared — a 
for me, and once in ten days store of all sorts of wine: 
a for all this I demanded not the bread of the governor, 
- * Or, deputies 








purpose of his visit to have time or inclination. for speculating i in 
4 There could, of course, have been no harm in itself in making 
‘speculative purchases of land. Perhaps he means that he did not 
e any advantage of the people’s poverty to buy at low prices. — 
_ 17. According to the M.T. three classes would seem to have 
been entertained at Nehemiah’s tables: (1) Jews; (2) rulers—also | 
Jews; (3) representatives of the Jews whose homes were con- 
jous to the lands inhabited by the surrounding nations. 

_ It seems to the present writer that the words the Jews are - 
_ simply a gloss from the margin to inform the reader that (in the 
gloss _glosser’s opinion) the persons intended by class 3 above were Jews. 
& the M.T. is kept, it is best, with Bertheau, to explain the Jews as 





eric, the ‘and’ before the two following classes being explica- — ~~ 
‘tive, as this conjunction often is in Hebrew (so Greek xa), ‘The or 
_ Jews both ...and.’ Van Hoonacker takes the Jewsto=thepoor — 
; ple (see on ver. 1), and the third class above to denote repre- © ze 
tatives (emissaries) of the nationsaround. Butthislastviewis 
3 exceedingly improbable, though it is used by the author to support sl 
_ his theory as to the priority of Nehemiah and Ezra. Bertholet — 
makes a clever guess, suggesting that the Hebrew for ‘ the Jews’ 
is. a corruption of the words for ‘ and it happened daily that.’ 
~ the heathen: see on ver. 8. 
18. that which was prepared, &c.: see 1 Kings iv. 22f, 
SShlomon’ s daily supply. 
for one day = ‘for each day.’ : 
+ once inten days, &c.: by omitting one letter from the Heb. 
“(6=‘in’ or ‘ with’) the sense conveyed by the E.VV. can be — — 
legitimately obtained from the Heb., hardly otherwise. To give 
-the Heb. in separate English words as has been done in orderto 
a0w that the clause has no meaning is very misleading, as the © 
E ~ syntactical relation—quite momentous in Heb.—is lost sight of. 
_ The thought is, however, rather strange, a fresh supply of all 
ds of wine was brought to the governor’s official (?) residence 
ane! ten days. “ 


































¥ 


ee, mente meee Se 


19 because the bondage was heavy upon i peo 2. 
member unto me, O my God, for good, all that 
done for this people. 

6 Now it came to pass, when it was manors to Sanballe 
and Tobiah, and to Geshem the Arabian, and unto” thee 
rest of our enemies, that I had builded the wall, and that 
there was no breach left therein ; (though even unto that — 

2 time I had not set up the doors in the gates ;) that San- — 
ballat and Geshem sent unto me, saying, Come, let us — 
meet together in ove of the villages in the plain of Ono. © 


the bondage: rather, the work to be done (in connexion 
with the walls). = 
19. See xiii. 14, 22,31, for a similar prayer; cf. ver. snd i. 
9,14. Such naive prayers abound in oriental and « especially ir 
-Arabic books. Bertholet (Comm.) cites a similar petition from “a 
Assyrian inscription. 


VI. 1-19. ComMPLETION OF THE WALLS NOTWITHSTANDING — 
OPpPpoSsITION FROM WITHOUT (1-9) AND TREACHERY 
WITHIN (10-19). 


1-4. Sanballat and his confederates endeavour to entice Ni 
into the country to kill him. 
1. Sanballat ... Tobiah: see on ii. Io. 
Geshem : see on ii. 19. 
the rest, &c. : perhaps the Ashdodites (see iv. 7). 
doors in the gates: see on iii. 3. The Heb. translated 
‘gate’ denotes here, as often, ‘ the gateway structure’ with re ie 
(2 Sam. xviii. 24), and upper chamber (2 Sam. xix. 1). The work 
of inserting the doors had been undertaken (see iii. 3, 6, 14 f.), 
it had been found impracticable up to the present to complete th 
part of the work owing perhaps to the labour and expense involved = 
see on xiii. 19. 4 
2. Sanballat and Geshem: why not Tobiah also? Probably 
because he was Sanballat’s secretary (see ver. 17). In ver. r_ 
(M.T., LXX; but not Syr., Zuc., and several Heb. MSS.) he is ~ 
coupled with Sanballat, ‘to Sanballat and Tobiah and to Gea m 
let us meet together : another of Nehemiah’s redundan 
(see on v. 15; cf. v.13). See, however, also Job ii. 11. 
in one of the villages: Heb. ‘in the villages,’ which is ola 
tolerable. Read (with Siegfried, &c.) ‘in Hakkepharim ’ (a ph 
name): cf. the proper name Kephivah ( =‘ village’) im vii. 29; 
Ezra ii. 25. 
in the plain of Ono: since Ono and Lod (Lydda) are o} 


“207- z > 





oe . they ‘out to do me mischief. And I sent messen-3 
gers unto them, saying, I am doing a great work, so that 
eI cannot come down: why should the work cease, whilst 

I leave it, and come downto you? And they sent unto 4 ~ 
- me four times after this sort; and I answered them after 
the same manner. ‘Then sent Sanballat his servant unto 5 
“me in like manner the fifth time with an open letter in his 
_hand ; wherein was written, It is reported among the 6 — 


" nations, and *Gashmu saith it,thatthou and the Jews think 
| ® In ver. 1, and elsewhere, Geshem. j 








~ mentioned together as lying in close contiguity (see xi. 35; Ezra - 
ii. 33; 1 Chron. viii. 12) it may be inferred that Hakkepharim was 
"some twenty miles to the north of Jerusalem and about eight to 
the east of Joppa. At such a distance the Jewish governor could _ 
_ be safely murdered, and in any case the work of rebuilding would. 
_ be seriously retarded had he been successfully beguiled to such a 
- far-off spot. Nehemiah could not then, had he been allowed to 
_ return, have brought the work toa close in less than two months 
_ (see on ver., 15). 
. they thought: Heb. ‘ purposed.’ 
to do me mischief: probably to assassinate him or to have 
him assassinated. 
; The noun rendered mischief occurs in r Sam xxili. 9 (Saul); 
- Esther viii. 13 (Haman). 
; 3. messengers: the usual word for angels (Gen, xlviii. 16, 
 &e.). Here as Deut. ii. 26, of men. 


a 5-9. Futile attempt to intimidate Nehemiah. r 
' 5. his servant: was this Tobiah his secretary? See ver. 17. 
' There was now in connexion with the open letter a part to play 
which required skill. 
A with an open letter: having failed four times with sealed 
letters intended for Nehemiah’s eye alone he made a bid for 
" greater success by sending a letter which was likely to meet the 
_eyes of Nehemiah’s ministers—the servant would see to this last. 
It was hoped that these ministers would accept Sanballat’s view ~ 
of the situation and influence their master, We read in Jer. 
_ XxXii. 9-14 of a sealed and unsealed contract, the latter being 
“merely a copy attached to the clay envelope containing the 
_ Other and exposed for consultation, the seal of the former being 
_ broken in cases of dispute only (see Driver, Jeremiah, 196f.). 


e letter: see on ii. 7. 


6. nations: the word translated heathen in v. 8 (see on). 
: Pp > 


RS Ce See gt ES, | 5S 
i - 3 ; ae es i on 
"5 = | ta v 5 
208 = NEHEMIAH 6. 7- 
} jae 7 te Se 

























to rebel; for which cause HE 2 builde: 
thou ratlidiest be their king, Hsien. e "thas € Wor 
_ 7 And thou hast also appointed prophets to pics of t 
_ at Jerusalem, saying, There is a king in Judah: and r 
~ shall it be reported to the king according to these wa 
Come now therefore, and let us take counsel toge th 
8 Then I sent unto him, saying, There are no such thing 
done as thou sayest, but thou feignest them out of thi 
9 own heart. For they all would have made us afraid, sayin 
Their hands shall be weakened from the work, that it b 
- not done. But now, ® O God, strengthen thou my bat 


® Or, J will strengthen my hands 


- Here the surrounding nations in league with Sanballat ; 
meant. 
Gashmu: see on ii. 19. 
. think: see on ver. 2. 
€- rebel: see Ezra iv. 13 for a similar charge, made also in 
nexion with the rebuilding of the walls, showing that this secti 
has nothing to do with the work of Ezra. : 
thou buildest: better ‘ rebuildest,’? a sign of rebellioi 
Why these walls if not to defy the power of Persia? Yet 
“knew better (see ver. 8). The walls were for defence against # 
_ people around. 
thou wouldest be their king: the participle in Heb. 
v. 3f.) may mean ‘thou wilt soon become king’ (as a matter 
fact), or ‘thou art becoming king,’ already on the road to 
goal of thine. 
7. prophets; there were prophets on Nehémiah’s side as well | 
as on the other (see ver. 10 ff.)._ No prophetic literature of hi 
period seems to have come down to us, me 
8. thou feignest: Heb. ‘thou ventest’: lit. (ef. Ar.) ‘cau: 
to begin.’ The same verb occurs in 1 Kings xii. 33. 
heart: in the psychology of the Hebrews the word her 
(lé) embraces the whole mind, feeling, will, and especially” 
tellect, all supposed to have their physiological counterpart in| 
heart (see on Ps. cxix. 2, Century Bible). f 
: 9. But now, &c.: render, ‘So now I strengthened my henley 
rd The Heb. permits and the versions and context support this 
>: rendering. The Divine Name is wholly absent from the M.T. 
__. The Heb. verb is the infinitive (or imperative ?), which is fre- 


“es quently tobe rendered by a tense form of the verb. pall e 






nd I went unto the cian Shemaiah oe son be : Be 










‘the one, and let us shut the doors of Wesonple: pe 
they will come to slay thee; yea, in the night will they — 
~ come to slay thee. And I sae. Should such a man as I rr 
flee? and who is there, that, being such as I, * would go ~ 
into the temple to save his life? I will not go in. And 1 2 















® Or, could go into the temple and live 





to-14. False prophets point out the difficulties and dangers of the work. 
°10. I went into the house of Shemaiah: why was this 
done ? Many say to obtain an oracle (Urim and Thummim 2) for — 
his guidance in a time of perplexity (see Jer. xxxvii. 17, xxxviii. 
14). But Nehemiah does not seem to have shown either doubt or — 
_ fear as to the course he should take (see ver. 3 ff.), and when this 
"man gives his advice Nehemiah spurns it. Why ‘could not Nehes 
‘miah visit this man or any other ina mere social way ? ae 
; Shemaiah: nowhere else mentioned. He was apparently : a 
k: eeeophet (see ver. 12) and a priest (See under next word). Es 
+ Delaiah: the name appears ina list of priestly housesin 
Chron, xxiv. 18. In the Sachau Papyri (i. 37) one of the two sons “4 
_ of Sanballat is so called. eh 
___ shut up: probably ceremonially unclean, and therefore dis- 
# qualified for entering the Temple; under a taboo (see t Sam. xxi. 
7; 1 Kings xiv. 10; W. Robertson Smith, Rel. Sem., 456). 
a Let us meet towstlior in the house of God: since 'Shemaiah, 
z _ though probably a priest, was for the time ceremonially excluded 
_ from the cultus, and no layman was allowed to enter the Temple ~ 
building, the proposal now made involves the violation of two 
- ritual laws. But Shemaiah was prepared to sacrifice religion to 
__ tactical considerations. His party was less strict than Nehemiah’s 
in matters of ‘ the law of Moses.’ _ e 
fee. (let us) shut: the verb usually employed of wel doors, 
not that in the word ‘shut’ noticed above. ; 
__. the doors of the temple: referring to the aro leaved door — 
E (hence the plural) leading from the inner court into the house E 
: a Kings vi. 33), not the doors between the haykal (holy place) and — 
he debir oS holy place) (x Kings vi. 31). 





























boats. Nehemiah has toomuch courage to flee and too much conscience 
‘o violate the sanctity of the house of | God. ie. 
“ie to Save his life: in accordance with the primitive law of 


PBs - Se yew 





210 NEHEMIAH 6. 13- 


I discerned, and, lo, God had not sent him 
nounced this prophecy against me: and Tobiz 
13 Sanballat had hired him. For this cause was he hi 
that I should be afraid, and do so, and sin, and that 
_ might have matter for an evil report, that they mig 
14Teproach me. Remember, O my God, Tobiah an 
Sanballat according to these their works, and also t 
prophetess Noadiah, and the rest of the prophets, t 
would have put me in fear. : 
15 So the wall was finished in the twenty and fifth day of 
16 the month Elul,,in fifty and two days. And it came f 























asylum connected with sanctuaries and altars. See Exod. xxi. : 
r Kings i. 50 f., ii. 28 (see note on former in Century B 
J. Skinner); Mic. x. 53; W. R. Smith, Rel. Sem.©, 138, 436; ¢ 
Exod. xxix,.12; Lev. iv. 7 ff. a. 
Nehemiah will not break what he regarded asa Divine awe 

the sake of saving his own life. ce: 
to save his life: lit. ‘that he may live.’ 

12. I discerned: he could see behind appearances (cf. 2 
iii. 36) that this man was inspired by the prospect of cash and 
by any Divine impulse (see Jer. xxili. 21, 32; Ezek. xiii. 2; af 
cf. Num. xvi. 28 and Jer. xxix. 19). 
13. For this cause was he hired: the Heb. words so t 
lated are no doubt a dittograph of the last clause of ver. 12 sligh 
changed, and must (with Luc., Siegfried, &c.) be omitted. 
English translation is here, as often, so well done as to largely h 
the defects of the Heb. 
14. Remember: for evil here, as in xiil. 29 ; ef. v. 19, xiii 
gt (‘remember for good’). 
Noadiah (=‘one who meets Yah’): nowhere else men- 
tioned. For other prophetesses cf. Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, | 
Hannah. 


15 f. The work completed. : 
15. Elul: the sixth month (August-September), the eleventh ~ 
in the secular year as now observed (see on Ezra x. 17). is” 
not named in the O.T. except here, though it is mentioned in 
1 Mace. xiv. 27. 
fifty and two days: this may seema very short interval of time _ 
for so great a task to be accomplished, but there are many con 
siderations which make for the account here given, (1) It mus 
have been a condition of Nehemiah’s leave of ha 


‘ x 3 a 


= NEHEMIAH Gris. Noo ae 





_ pass, when all our enemies heard ‘¢hereof, that all the 
heathen that were about us * feared, and were much cast 


down in their own eyes: for they perceived that this work — 


was wrought of our God. Moreover in those days the 
nobles of Judah sent many letters unto Tobiah, and ¢he 
fetters of Tobiah came unto them. For there were 
-Many in Judah sworn unto him, because he was the son 

in law of Shecaniah the son of Arah; and his son 
® According to another reading, saw. 





should expedite the work as much as possible. That he remained 
away twelve years was due to difficulties in reform and reorgani- 
zation which could not be foreseen {see on ii. 6). (2) v. 16gives the 
impression of great haste in the work. (3) The walls had not to 
be built but only rebuilt, and there are indications in ch. iii that 
large parts needed little or no repairing (see ver. 13, &c.). (4) It 
is exceedingly probable that others before Nehemiah had set 
~ about the restoration of the walls, though they were hindered 
and their work to some extent undone (see p. 160, BETWEEN 
Ezra and NEHEMIAH). (5) The materials for the building were 
for the most part ready to hand, for the old stones could be used 
for the new wall or parts of the wall. 


According to Josephus (Anjiig., v. 7, 8) the builders took two — 


years and four months for the work. Ewald following him in this 
would in the present verse insert ‘two years,’ reading therefore 
‘two years and fifty-two days,’ which would, however, be less 
than the time given by Josephus to the extent of some two months. 
All the versions are in favour of the M.T., from which there are no 
good reasons for departing. 
16. were much cast down : lit. ‘ fell very much,’ an unique ex- 


pression, though intelligible. It is better to make a small change ~ 


in one word and to read (with Klostermann) ‘and it was very 
wonderful in their eyes.’ 

this work was wrought of our God: a thought constantly 
in the mind of Nehemiah (see i. 5 f., &c.); cf. Ps. cxviii. 23, 
exxvi. 2f, 


17-19. Jewish noblemen conspire with Tobiah. 
17. nobles: see onii. 16. 
letters: see on ii. 7. 
18. sworn unto him: upon his marrying into a Jewish 
family there would be on both sides an undertaking by oath, he to 


__ be loyal to his new people, they to be true to their new initiate. 


Arah: see vii. 10; Ezraii. 5. 


cK uc? ae x 























Jehohanan had taken the daughter of Mesbullat 

f Big son of Berechiah to wife. Also they spake of iia 
‘deeds before me, and reported my words to him. - 

: ~— Tobiah sent letters to put me in fear. 





ar’ Seiad the Levites were appointed, that I gave my broth 
_-_ _Hanani, and Hananiah the governor of the castle, chal 
over Jerusalem : for he was a faithful man, and fez 


Meshullam > see on iii. 4, 30. 

had taken . . . to wife: sce on ii. ro, In the East slaves n 

seldom rise to high positions and make grand marriages; cf. 

Mameluke dynasties of Egypt. Some of the finest Arab poets 
at first slaves. 

19. Render, ‘And they spake before me with regard to 

words, and reported to him my words,’ ¥ 

his good deeds: Heb. ‘his good’ (qualities, words, deeds? 

a mere adjective in the feminine (=neuter) 5 ; read ‘his words 


so LXX ; cf. Syr., ‘my good words’ and parallelism. g ; 

~ VII. 1-73° + XI. 1 fi. 
: MEASURES TAKEN FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE CITY AND HE ey 
at INCREASE OF ITS POPULATION. S 


iy 
ay ra 

1-3. Provisions for the defence of the city. 

1. doors: see on ili, 3 and Vi. 1. 
porters: better ‘ gate- keepers,’ the word being a denomin 
tive from the noun =‘ gate’ (see on Ezra ii. 42). 
fc. singers ... Levites: probably an early addition to the te 
' so early that all the versions vouch for it. What had these Temple 
officials to do with the city gates? The older and many zoe 
commentators say that Nehemiah appointed them to share 
_ responsibility of guarding the gates because they could, above ma 
Jerusalemites (cf. vi. 17-19), be * usted. ; 

2. Hanani: see oni. 2: as awell-tried brother he could trust 
him as he could also Hananiah, the governor of the citadel or — 
castle (see on ii. 8), who was really general of the city forces, pe = 
__- haps a Persian official, though (cf. name) a Jew by nationality. 
rk he was a faithful man: referring to Hananiah. His o 
_____brother’s loyalty was too well known to need chronicling. Nek 
-____ miah did well for his cause in placing two men so trustworthy it 
general charge of Jerusalem. Fels 


. -% 


paren 


ae NEHEMIAH 7.3. N ; 213 
' God above many. And I said unto them, Let not the 3 
_ gates of Jerusalem be opened until the sun be hot ; and 
- while they stand ow guard, let them shut the doors, ~ 
. and bar ye them: and appoint watches of the inhabitants 
_ of Jerusalem, every one in his watch, and every one zo dé 





_ 8. 1 said: correcting rightly (with all the ancient versions) 
the Heb. consonantal text, ‘ he said.’ 
until the sun be hot: until the sun has fully risen, perhaps 
homore is meant. The gatesof Eastern cities are opened as soon 
_ asthe sunrises. Is the phrase in the text intended to prevent a 
confusion between the sunshine and moonshine ? 
: and while they (the porters) stand: the words on guard 
. are inserted by our translators to supply the deficiencies of the 
M.T. The Heb. is in other respects peculiar and even inaccu- 
rate. It is better to make some changes in the text (see Bertholet) 
and to render, ‘ And while the sun is hot(= before sunset) let the 
doors be shut and barred.’ 
let them shut ...bar ye them: both verbs are passive 
in the versions, and bya well-known idiom (‘indefinite subject’) 
the Heb. can be so rendered, making, however, a slight change 
in the second verb. 
_ shut: the Heb. verb is found nowhere else in the O.T., though 
in the Talmud it has in the same form (Hp) the same meaning. 
bar ye: read passive third pers. ‘let them bar’ = ‘let (them) 
be barred ’ (see before). The verb=‘ to lay hands on,’ ‘seize, but 
seems in 1 Kings vi. 10 to mean as here to ‘apply the bars to.’ 
appoint: the verb is infinitive absolute, used as a strong im- 
perative—so often. No textual change is therefore necessary. 
The persons addressed are Hananiand Hananiah. 
watches: divisions of the night for the purpose of watching. 
Before the exile anc for long afterwards the Hebrews had (as the 
Greeks and Babylonians) three watches of four hours each. In 
- our Lord’s day and for some time (how long?) before there were 
- four (see Mark xiii. 35 and cf, Matt. xiv. 25; Mark vi. 48). See on 
‘Ps. xe. 4 and cxix. 148 (Century Bible). 
These two men were to set up (lit. ‘ make to stand’), i. e. prob- 
_ ably restore, a system of night-watches for (all) Jerusalem men, 
whereby each was to take his turn, and in doing so to stand sentinel 
in front of his own house. How all this was arranged is a matter - 
of detail about which the surviving writings of the annalist tell us 
nothing, but there can be no doubt it would be seen to that no 
extensive portion of the city was at any time without its watchman, 
There was certainly but one set of watchmen, not many, as some 
(Bertheau, &c.) have thought, for no difference of functions is 
implied. 


: 


“ 






5 not builded. And my God put into my heart to gather 
together the nobles, and the “rulers, and the people, that 
they might be reckoned by genealogy. And I found 


> 


® Or, deputies en 









4-73° + xi. rf. Measures for increasing tie population of J * 

4. (the city was) wide: Heb, ‘ wide on both hands,” the literal ~ 
sense of the phrase in Ps. civ. 25. The words take on, however, 
as here, the meaning of extending far in all directions s (see Gen. . 
Xxxiv. 2, &c.). Lae: 

. houses were not builded: how, then, could the inhabit F 
when watching stand before them ? ‘The verb rendered ‘buildec hei 
means ‘rebuilt,’ and even ‘repair,’ as in ch, iii, The w: > 
said to be rebuilt, though much of it was perfect. So here we fg 5 
probably to understand that the work of restoring the houses” in 
a general way had not been undertaken for lack of a sufficient 
population, for the houses taken would be set right each by its — 

occupants. The surmise of Paul Haupt that ‘houses’ refers to * 
the families which had not been reorganized is too fanci a 
though favoured by the following verses and not opposed to 
usage as regards the word ‘house.’ 

5. my God put into my heart, &c. : see ii, 12 and Ezra vii, Be 
nobles... rulers: see on ii. 16. . 
people: see on v. I, 17. qj 
that they might be reckoned by genealogy =that ase 

might be allocated each to his tribe, clan, and family: see on 
Ezra ii. 62, wal 

Most scholars agree that the purpose for which the erica 

families, &c., was now called for and supplied was with a view to” 

. the repeopling of Jerusalem. A proportion of the country popu- 
lation would have to be transferred to the capital, but only such 
as were pure-blooded Jews (see xi. 1 ff.), In order to be able to © 
prove the possession of this qualification a genealogical register 
was necessary, and was found where the author of Ezra ii found — 
his—in fact, it is the same list. This interpretation assumed an _— 
eee connexion between ver. 73* and xi. 1, the section | 3 


= '_x being regarded as an extract from the biography of Ezra 


hich has accidentally or otherwise got away from its right place. 
There is not a word in this chapter indicating explicitly the saison 
@’ étre of this list at this time, but the explanation given above is ats 
least a reasonable one. See further on xi, 

I found the book of the genealogy, &c: where? pec 
in-the Temple archives : see Introduction to Ezra ii, 




















those that had been carried away, whom Nebuchaaserae 
the king of Babylon had carried away, and that returned 
“unto Jerusalem and to Judah, every one unto his city; — 
ho came with Zerubbabel, Jeshua, Nehemiah, Azariah, 7 — 
aamiah, Nahamani, Mordecai, Bilshan, Mispereth, 
Bigvai, Nehum, Baanah. The number of the men of — 
' the people of Israel: the children of Parosh, two thou- 8 
_ sand an hundred and seventy and two. The children of 9 
~ Shephatiah, three hundred seventy and two. The child- 10 a 
ten of Arah, six hundred fiftyand two. The children of 
Pahath-moab, of the children of Jeshua and Joab, two 
" thousand and eight hundred azd eighteen. The children'12 
of Elam, a thousand two hundred fifty and four. The13  ~ 
‘children of Zattu, eight hundred forty and five. The14 ~ 
children of Zaccai, seven hundred and _ threescore. — : 
"The children of Binnui, six hundred forty and eight. The 15, 16 
4 children of Bebai, six hundredtwentyand eight. The child- 17_ 
“ren of Azgad, two thousand three hundred twenty and 
- The children of Adonikam, six hundred threescore 18 _ 


~ a 
=. 





and seven. The children of Bigvai, two thousand three- a 
score and seven. The children of Adin, six hundred fifty 20° : 
and five. ‘The children of Ater, of Hezekiah, ninety and ar 
eight. The children of Hashum, three hundred twenty 22 
and eight. -The children of Bezai, three hundred twenty 23 — 

~ and four. The children of Hariph, an hundred and 24 
ceeelve: The children of Gibeon, ninety and five... The 25) 4 F 


: ® See Ezra ii. 1, ‘Be ; 
6-73%. List of those who returned. As this list is practically 

_ identical with that in Ezra ii the reader must for lack of space be 

_ referred to the general and detailed remarks on that chapter. are 






















Say She BFORS " 
ey ay and eight. twen 
“28, 29 eight. The men of Beth-demaved forty and two. 
ge EEN of Kiriath-jearim, Chephirah, and Beeroth, s 
ae: _ 30 hundred forty and three. The men of Ramah and Ge 
4 o 31 six hundred twenty and one. The men of Michmas, ; 
_ 32 hundred and twenty andtwo. The men of Beth-el 2 
_~ 33 Ai, an hundred twenty and three. The men of theo , 
34 Nebo, fifty and two. The children of the other Elam, ~ 
~ 35a thousand two hundred fifty and four. The children 
36 of Harim, three hundred and twenty. The children of 
_ 37 Jericho, three ‘hundred forty and five. The childre 
of Lod, Hadid, and Ono, seven hundred twenty ar 
,38one. The children of Senaah, three thousand niné ~ 
39 hundred and thirty. The priests: the children of Jedaiah, 
'/ © of the house of Jeshua, nine hundred seventy and t 
40, 41 The children of Immer, a thousand fifty and two. 
children of Pashhur, a thousand two hundred forty 
42 seven. The children of Harim, a thousand and seven- - 
43 teen. The Levites: the children of Jeshua, of Kadmiel, 
44 0f the children of *Hodevah, seventy and four. The 
_ Singers: the children of Asaph, an hundred forty a 1d 
- 45 eight. The porters: the children of Shallum, the child Ce 
_ ren of Ater, the children of Talmon, the children of 
__ Akkub, the children of Hatita, the children of Shobai, 
- 46 an hundred thirty and eight. The Nethinim: the child>— 
= ren of Ziha, the children of Hasupha, the children ar: 
47 Tabbaoth ; the children of Keros, the children of 7 
48 the children of Padon ; the children of Lebana, the chil 
4g Ten of Hagaba, the childs of Salmai; the childre 
____ of Hanan, the children of Giddel, the children of Gahats. 
0 the children of Reaiah, the children of Rezin, the child- i 
¢ ‘51 ren of Nekoda; the children of Gazzam, the children, : 


\t 


te ® Another reading is, Hodeiah. 






_ “ < } 








he children of Meunim, the children ot ® Nephushesim ; 
the children of Bakbuk, the children of Hakupha, the 53 
‘children of Harhur; the children of Bazlith, the child- 54 
B ren of Mehida, the children of Harsha ; the children of 55 
y Barkos, the children of Sisera, the bifideen of Temah ; 


“the childreit of Neziah, the children of Hatipha. The 56, 57 


’ children of Solomon’s servants: the children of Sotai, 


the children of Sophereth, the children of Perida ; the 58 


_ children of Jaala, the children of Darkon, the children of 
- Giddel; the children of Shephatiah, the children of Hattil, 59 
~the children of Pocherethhazzebaim, the children of 


' Amon. All the Nethinim, and the children of Solomon’s 60 ~ 


_ Servants, were three hundred ninety andtwo. And these 6r 
were they which went up from Tel-melah, Te#-harsha, 

_ Cherub, Addon, and Immer: but they could not shew 
their fathers’ houses, nor their seed, whether they were of 
Israel: the children of Delaiah, the children of Tobiah, 62 
' the children of Nekoda, six hundred forty andtwo. And 63 
' of the priests: the children of Hobaiah, the children of 
_ Hakkoz, the children of Barzillai, which took a wife of 
the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and was called 


that were reckoned by genealogy, but it was not found: 
_ therefore » were they deemed polluted and put from the 
' priesthood. And the ¢Tirshatha said unto them, that 65 
they should not eat of the most holy things, till there 
stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim. The whole 66 


=." * 
} 


ae D EHEMIAH 7. 0-67 de vee 217 oer : 
the children of Paseah ; the children of Besai, 52 wee 
t 


after their name. These sought their register among those 64 ~ 


“congregation together was forty and two thousand three 


“hundred and threescore, beside their menservants and 67. 


_ their maidservants, of whom there were seven thousand 


® Another reading is, Wephishesim. 
oo Heb, a iiey were polluted from the priesthood. © Or, governor 


2 SS a oe - 


4 


218 ~. NEHEMIAH 7. 68-7 









68 dred forty and five singing men and singing women. The 
horses were seven hundred thirty and six; their mule 
69 two hundred forty and five; ‘/er camels, four 
dred thirty and five ; ¢he‘r asses, six thousand sey 
70 hundred and twenty. And some from among the heads 
of fathers’ houses gave unto the work. The Tirshatha ~ 
gave to the treasury a thousand daries of gold, fifty basonsy 
71 five hundred and thirty priests’ garments. And some of — 
the heads of fathers’ Houses gave into the treasury of the 
work twenty thousand darics of gold, and two thousand — 
72 and two hundred * pound of silver. And that which 
rest of the people gave was twenty thousand darics of 
and two thousand pound of silver, and threescore and — 
73 Seven priests’ garments. So the priests, and the Levies 
and the porters, and the singers, and some of the peo 
and the Nethinim, [C,. ] and all Israel, dwelt in their cities 
b And when the seventh month was come, the child 


® Heb. maneh. > See Ezra iii. 1. ~ . 








Tur Rerorms or Ezra, conTINUING THE HisToRY oF ie *) 


vii. 73°-viii. 12 (=1 Esd. ix. 37-55). The public read 
the law and its effect on the people. This section forms a na 
sequel to Ezra x: see Introduction to Ezra ix. f. 

vii. 73° wie 8. The reading and expounding of the law. % 

vii. 73° and viii. r have so much in common with Ezra ii. a 
that some connexion seems likely, especially as in both 
a genealogical register precedes. The resemblances are pro 
due to the fact that the writer of the present paragraph had the ~ 
other before him. vii. 73° might well be an interpolation, though — 
it has the support of all the versions. 

73°. the seventh month : i. e. Tishri (see on Ezra iii. 1). beh cd 
year is meant we are not told, but the inquiry regarding the 
mixed marriages was brought to an end in the tenth month of © 
457 B.c. (see Ezra x, 17 and the context), the putting away of the — 

_ strange wives occurring on the first day of the following year. 

i.e. Nisan 1, 456. It seems likely that the ‘seventh month’ of 
the present verse belongs to the year last named. The coi 


. “4 
‘ 








Pr eS | NEHEMIAH Shi, 7. C. = 219 





_ ren of Israel were in their cities. And all the people 8 

' gathered themselves together as one man into the broad 

" place that was before the water gate ; and they spake unto 

_ Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses, 
“which the Lorp had commanded to Israel. And Ezra the 2 


dence of popular assemblies meeting in Tishri at widely separated 
periods (Ezra iii. 1 and here) need occasion no surprise, since in it 
_ the most important festivals were held—Atonement, Tabernacles, 
&e. Besides, originally, as now, this month began the new year, 
and this might well suggest a new start in life, made more possible 
by having the law of their life made known to the people. 
1. broad place: see on iii. 26 and Ezra x. 9. 
water gate: see oniii. 26. 
and they spake...to bring: the Hebrew means ‘they 
gave orders. . . that he should bring,’ the Hebrew as in Esther i. 
T7 (R.V. ‘commanded’) and iv. 13 (R.V. ‘bade’). Since Ezra 
_ had brought with him a copy of the law (Ezra vii. 25), it has 
“been ever regarded as surprising that he should have so long 
withheld it, and hence Winckler joins the present chapter imme- 
diately to Ezra viii, though the evidently close connexion between 
Ezra viii and ix makes this supposition an impossible one: see 
~p. 133 f. 
- (Ezra) the seribe: read with 1 Esdras ‘the priest and 
Scribe’ (see verses 2, 4,.9). 
the book of the law of Moses: called in ver. 2 ‘ the law,’ and 
~ in ver. 5 ‘the book,’ the former indicating its contents and the 
latter its form (the Hebrew rendered ‘book’ means in the O. Ty 
‘roll,’ though there is also for the latter a distinct word). The 
Hebrew /orah, translated ‘law, means strictly ‘ teaching,’ ‘instrue- 
tion.” In Ps. Ixxviii, 1 ‘my law’ is parallel to ‘the words of my 
mouth.’ It came to denote especially the Divine will as revealed 
through prophets and priests, and hence soon acquired the, sense 
_ ‘law.’ In post-biblical Hebrew it is the technical term for the 
- Pentateuch, but it never has that meaning inthe O.T. The law 
which Ezra brought and published was much smaller in its scope 
than the ‘Five Books,’ and did not contain the whole of the 
_ Priestly Code, though largely coinciding with it. The early 
religious laws of the Hebrews came soon to be connected with 
the name of Moses, the traditional legislator of the nation, just as 
the religious songs were at an early time ascribed to the David of 
Chronicles, David the organizer of the Temple Psalmody. See 


_ for a fuller discussion of the nature and extent of Ezra’s law, 
p. off 





220, vi 






» 3 upon the first day of the seventh month. And he 1 
therein before the broad place that was before the’ wa 
gate “from early morning until midday, in the prese 
of the men and the women, and of those that could under- 
stand ; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto 
& Heb. Srom the light. rie 





2. congregation : see on ‘Ezra ii. 64. or 
The old tradition that Ezra established and presided over. 
institution called the Great Synagogue, which in the inten 
between the prophets and the scribes superintended Jewis 
affairs, arose out of the adhoc assemblies described in Neh. viii- 
and has not a vestige of support in the O. T., though it is impli 
in the Mishna (Pirge Abot, r). Elias Levita (d. 1549) started the é 
view, afterwards so generally held, that the O. T. Canon was fi 
by this council with Ezra at its head, though it is now cite, 
eertain that many parts of the O.T. were not even written until — 
centuries later. It is strange to find a modern Jewish scholar pe 
Dr. Schechter ' adhering still to this tradition, though its absurdity 
has been proved by Kuenen (see his Collected Essays, edited a 
put into German ie! Budde, p. 125 ff.): cf. W. Robertson Smith, 
OTJC.®, 169 f. (n.). a 
and all that could hear with understanding: better (0 : 
Heb.) ‘all that understood as they heard.’ Of course childr 
are meant (see x. 28 (29)). The Hebrew verb, which = ‘t 
understand,’ has also the causative sense ‘ to cause ‘to unders : 
as in verses 7, 9, &c. (see on Ezra viii. 16). This is pei, 
a usage well known to Hebrew and Arabic scholars (‘ ie 
Hiphil’). 
the first day of the seventh month: a great day among ¢ 
Jews (see Lev. xxiii. 23-25; Num. xxix. 1-6, poo 
passages). From the time of Alexander the Great Jews ha 
kept this day as their New Year day. In Nehemiah’s He 
importance attached to the day seems a survival of early usage, — 
for it was in Nisan that the year began in the centuries imme-— 
diately following the exile. See on Ezra x. 17. 
3. from early morning: Heb. (not as in the R.Vm. “ but’) 
‘from the time it began to be light? 
until midday, when the excessive heat made further standing: . 
in the-open impracticable. Most Orientals have about this time ‘ 
' of the day a long siesta. 


i 








oe 
fre AS 
‘ 





' See Studies in Fudaism, 2nd series, pp. 67 and 105 f. 





= 
f, 
di 
4 


Sem r 8. 4. Cc. 221 


ae ook of. the law. And Ezra the scribe stood upon a4 
@ pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose ; 
and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, 
and Uriah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; 
and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchi- 


_ jah, and Hashum, and Hashbaddanah, Zechariah, and 


® Heb. /ower. 


(Ezra) the scribe: read (with 1 Esdras) ‘the priest and 


Z be” as in ver. I (see on). 


4 


pulpit: the Hebrew word is the ordinary one for ‘ tower,” 
but means literally ‘what is high.’ Here one may think of 
a wooden platform capable of holding over a dozen (or over 
fourteen) men. A pulpit in the modern sense is of course out of 
the question, and for that reason the use of the word is misleading 
and unfortunate. ‘ 

(made) for the purpose: Syr., Lic., and Vulg. (varying the 


‘Hebrew vowels) read ‘to speak’ (on). The LXX omits the clause. 


and beside him, &c.: the number of men (Levites?) on 
Ezra’s right and left hand respectively differ in_ the various 
authorities as follows: M.T. and Syr., six and seven; the LXX 
(best MSS.), six and four ; Luc.,seven and seven ; Vulg., six and 
six; 1 Esdras, seven and six. As a copyist is more likely to omit 
than to insert, Luc. (seven on both hands) is more likely to 
represent the original text, though the number twelve (six on each 
side) would correspond to the number of tribes, and is therefore 


- often preferred. Apart from omission in the smaller lists, the names 


are in the main identical. The names here mentioned seem, as 
Bertheau points out, to stand for individuals and not, as in the names 
in ili, in ver. 7 and in ix. 4, x. 9, the names of clans or families. - 
Who were these fourteen (or twelve?) men? Probably 
priests, though not (as Rawlinson) ‘chief priests of the course 
which was at the time performing the temple service.’ Some of 
the names in this list appear in x.2-9 as priests, as Malchiah, 
Meshullam, and perhaps Maaseiah (? = Maaziah), though in the 
latter the names stand for clans or houses. The law now made 
public by Ezra had been gradually evolved within the priestly 
circle before, during, and after the exile, and as in it the rights 
and privileges of the priests were safeguarded, one would expect — 


_to see Ezra supported by the priesthood on so memorable an 


occasion as this. Why, however, do we not read of the attend- 
ance and support of the high- -priest, who in the new community 


had been accorded so favoured a place? Perhaps envy of Ezra’s 





assumed position kept this official away, not, surely, opposition to 


‘ 






















6 when he oleed it, all the people stood up: and 
a a Ezra blessed the Lorp, the great God. And all @ 
people answered, Amen, Amen, with the lifting ont 
____ their hands : and they bowed their heads, and worshipp 

wa the Lorn with their faces to the ground. Also Jes 
¢ and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbe 
__ . Hodiah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hz 
Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understz 


the publication of the law up to. now esoteric in the priesthe 
for its publication could not but promote the prestige and powé 
c of the high-priesthood. = 
- 5. opened the book = unrolled the parchment roll: see Luke. 
17- Bound books in the modern sense were not known 
_ A,D. 300. Even then the writing material was parchment « 
_. vellum. + 
all the people stood up: according to Rabbinical tradition 
it was the custom from the time of Moses onwards for the people 
to stand while the law was being read. Standing was a mark of 
: ae respect : see Judges iii. 20 and perhaps Job xxxvil. 14. Herzfeld 
: quotes the latter passage for his rendering here ‘stood still.’ eg 
ars. 6. and Ezra blessed, &c.: in the modern synagogue prayers — de 
sn are offered when the law is taken from its keeping-place ssi 
haykal) and when it is returned. See the Jewish Prayer 
Sabbath morning service. : 
Amen: lit. ‘ firm,’ ‘ established’ ; then as adverb ‘ certai 
- ‘assuredly.’ See v. 13; Deut. xxvii. 14 ff.; 1 Kings i. 36; 
xi. 5, xxviii. 6, all pre-exilic passages except the first, showing 
that the word was in use before the exile. Its liturgical 
meets us in post-exilic writings only, as in Num. v. 22; 1 Chron, 
xvi. 36; Ps. evi. 48, &c., though one cannot therefore say — 
y positively that this latter use was unknown in pre-exilic times. _ 
2 with the lifting up of their hands: see on Ezraix. 5. 
7. Jeshua, &c.: of the thirteen names seven are mentioned < 
’ Levites elsewhere (see ix. 5 and x, 9-14). The LXX has the thre 
first names only, the Vulgate agreeing with the M.T., and ae 
Syr. having a smaller number—eleven. The names all "stand for 
_ the families so called (cf. Jeshua), though of course they were 
— __ originally personal. 5 
ae and (the Levites): omit with Vulg. and 1 Esdras. 
(= retained it is the explicative ‘and’ (=‘even’), ~ At 







' ‘NEHEMIAH 8.8-9. Cz ” 2agi ee 





i cpaked F : aa 
the law : and the people stood in their place. And they8 
tead in the book, in the law of God, distinctly; and _ 
they gave the sense, »so that they understood the reading. 
And Nehemiah, which was the Tirshatha, and Ezra the 


_ * Or, with an interpretation > Or, and caused them to understand 


~ 


9 





2 and the people stood in their place: the word italicized ; 
' occurs in 2 Chron. xxx. 16, and has perhaps to be restored here : 
_ see Neh. ix. 3, where a verb of similar import occurs. The sense 
_is ‘the people stood in the place set apart for them.’ 
- 8. Render, ‘And they read in the book of the law of God, 
“uttering the words distinctly and giving the sense (of the words) 
_ and the (connected) meaning at the (=each) section.’ 
: they read: perhaps Ezra read the section (perashah), the 
_ Levites reading the prepared interpretation. 
4 in the law: omit one letter repeated by mistake and read 
_ of the law.’ 
distinctly : see on Ezraiv. 18. The form of the word has 
_ tobe altered so as to assimilate it with the verbal form following, — 
both being then infinitive absolutes used gerundially: see the 
translation above. A noun cognate with the verbal form occurs 
' in Esther iv. 7 (‘exact sum’) and x. 2 (* full account’). 
a (gave) the sense: i. e. the meaning of the words. 
_ + so that they understood: make a slight change in the 
_ Hebrew and thus get a noun parallel to that translated ‘sense.’ 
_ The word thus obtained implies a deeper knowledge, one involv- 
_ ing a perception of the relation of the separate things considered. 
_ The same two words are also in parallelism in 1 Chron. xxii. 12 ; 
_2 Chron. ii. 11. It is obviously a mistake to make the writer 
_ mean that as the people were ignorant of Hebrew the original text - 
"had to be turned into Aramaic. The Jews had not lost their 
" knowledge of Hebrew in the exile, as the writings of Haggai, 
Zechariah, Ezra, Nehemiah, &c., show. 
; the reading: we should probably render ‘at the (= each) 
’ section,’ a common meaning of the word in Rabbinical Hebrew, 


9-12. Ezra commands the people to rejoice and not to weep. 

9. Nehemiah ...the Tirshatha: this whole clause is 
certainly to be omitted, as is suggested by the isolated mention 
of Nehemiah here, as in x. 2, and by the varied forms taken by 
the clause in the Versions, If this leader were on the scene at 
this time he could not have played a great part in the reforms now 
_ going forward. In 1 Esdras we have simply ‘Attharates,’ which, ~- 
_ as._t Esd. v. 40 shows, is given as a proper name. In the Syr. 
' ‘Nehemiah the high-priest’ is the phrase, whereas in the LXX 
- itis simply ‘ Nehemiah.’ Luc, and the Vulg. agree with the M.T. 


Q 


i at | all a 





~ 10 when they heard the words of the law. Then he § 


I 


_ 


‘Official title) is applied.to Zerubbabel. Nehemiah is never : 










said unto all the people, This day is holy unto the Li 
your God ; mourn not, nor weep. For all the people w w 


unto them, Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the swee 
and send portions unto him for whom nothing is prepared: 
for this day is holy unto our Lord: neither be ye grieved 
for the joy of the Lorn is your “strength. So the Levites_ 
stilled all the people, saying, Hold your peace, for the 
® Or, strong hold i 





Tirshatha: see on Ezra ii. 63, where this epithet (not | 


described ; he is called ‘Governor’ (pekhah) : see on Ezra viii. ; i 
(Ezra) the priest the scribe: see verses 1, 4. ~ . 
the Levites that taught: see on Ezra viii. 16. This was 

their function; Ezra seems to have only-read the portion to ale 

explained : see on ver. 8 
This day is holy: see on ver. 1. It was the new moon. 

of the seventh month. Ri 
mourn not, &c.: note how in an earlier age the introduction ; 





of the Deuteronomic law was followed by weeping, as the publi- 
cation of Ezra’s law is now (see 2 Kings xxii. 11, 19). Dhe 
people saw their sins in a new light when the standard of perfect 
conduct was brought before them. But festal days were inten 
to be times of rejoicing (see next verse). 
10. he (said): i.e. Ezra: see on ver, 9. 
eat the fat, and drink the sweet: i.e. eat and drink t the | 
best you can get; do not fast in any degree, it is high festival 
time. 

















send portions: all festivals among the Semites were” 
seasons of social conviviality, to which the sojourner, orphan, 
widow, &c., were to be invited (Deut. xvi. 11, 14). Portions of 
what was offered were sent to those who could not join the 
company, the poor, &c. (Esther ix 19, 22): see G. B. Gray « 
Num. xxii. 40. The word rendered ‘ portions” means perhaj 
‘choice bits’ : see on Esther ii. 9. ae 
the joy of the LORD (= Yahweh): objective genitive, ‘the 

joy you have or take in Yahweh.’ See Ps. ix. 3, Xxxii. II. i 
your strength: Heb. ‘ your safe retreat,’ ‘refuge,’ not, as 

the R.Vm., ‘stronghold,’ though the Massorites so explaine 
the word. ae) 
11. Hold your peace: i.e. Do not weep aloud (see ver. 7 





Sty is holy ; neither be ye grieved. And all the people 
“went their way to eat, and to drink, and to send portions, 
and to make great mirth, because they had understood the 
_ words that were declared unto them. 

And on the second day were gathered together the 


; heads of fathers’ Aowses of all the people, the priests, 
and the -Levites, unto Ezra the scribe, even to give atten- 
tion to the words of the law. And they found written in 


the day is holy: i.e. set apart for Yahweh ; whatever has to 


‘do with Him should give joy. 


12. portions: see-on ver, Io. 
13-18. Celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, as prescribed by the 


newly found law. 
It is the month Tishri (see on ver. 1). The law book had been 


“NEHEMIAH 8. 12-14, C; 2a 


12 


made known. In this month the Feast of Tabernacles fell (15 to 
_ 21 or to 22), and the newly instructed people, led by their specially 


instructed leaders, set about the keeping ofthis festival. It is now 


_ the second day, and thirteen days more must come and go before 


By 


“the Feast’ (see on ver. 18) will begin. The tenth day of the 
month is that prescribed in the Priestly Code for what became the 
most solemn fast of the Jewish code (see Exod. xxix. 36, xxx. 10; 
Lev. xxiii. 27f., xxv.9). Yet nothing is said about this fast, the 


Day of Atonement, proof enough surely that the laws enacting it 


formed no part of Ezra’s torah. 
13. heads of fathers’ houses ... priests and the Levites: 


Ezra now instructs an inner circle in his law as he had previously 


the whole congregation. His purpose would be to supply the 
leaders with information about points too recondite for the multi- 
tude, and also perhaps to give directions as to the carrying out of 


the law. 


heads of fathers’ houses: see on Ezra ii. 59. 

even : omit with the versions (LXX, Luc., Syr., Vulg.). 

to give attention to: better, ‘that he might give the sense of 
the (different) parts of the law.’ The Heb. verb here is cognate 


with the noun rendered ‘sense’ in ver. 8, and means often to 
_ teach,’ as in ix, 20, Ps. xxxii. 8, &c.; i.e. ‘to give the sense of.’ 


the words of: the Heb. term denotes ‘things’ as well as 
‘words,’ and is often used as here in the sense of details, minutiae 


(see Jer. v. 21; Ps. Ixv. 4, cxxxvii. 2, cxlv. 5), Ezra had to ex- 
; 4 5 





plain to this select company the detailed points and especially the 


hard ones of the law. 
14. The laws concerning the Feast of Tabernacles occur in all 
the principal Hexateuch codes in different forms corresponding to 


ie eas sit Q2 


















15 feast of the seventh month: and that they raul pu 
and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, say 
_Go forth unto the mount, and fetch olive branches, an 

branches of wild olive, and myrtle branches, and p 
branches, and branches of thick trees, to make boc 
16 as it is written. So the people went forth, and brough 
_ them, and made themselves booths, every one upon ~ 


different stages of belief and practice (see Exod, xxiii. 16 (JE 
Deut. xvi. 13, 16 ; Lev. xxiii. 39-43 (H) ; and Lev. xxiii. 34-36 
Ezek, xlv. 25). The statements in verses 14-18 of the present p 
ter show that the writer had before him the third of the above 
sections alone (Lev. xxiii. 39-43) which belongs to the Holines 
Code (Lev. xvii-xxvi). Moreover the words given as written in 
the law differ in detail from those of the section used, showing 
that small importance was attached to the mere words of the law. 
by Moses: cf. ver 1 (‘the law of Moses’). The very old 
‘tradition as to the Mosaic origin of the law and the later one as 
to the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch is so far correct that Moses” 
must have laid down the general lines of a legal code which con- 
tinued to be modified and expanded down to the fourth conkers 
B,c.: see p. rof. , 
that the children of Israel should awell in booths : no- 
where else in the O.T. is this prescribed except i in Lev. xxiii. 42. ‘ 
15. that they should publish: cf. Lev. xxiii. 1, 4 
the mount: here as often=the mountain land, i i.e. Judah. 2 
fetch olive branches ...to make booths: there is noth 
in Lev. xxiii saying that the branches, &c., to be gathered wer 
_ be used in constructing booths, though (so Keil, Dillmann, &c.) that 
may be intended. All that is commanded is that the people were ~ 
to take the fruit of goodly trees, ‘branches of palm trees, boughs 
~. of thick trees (=myrtles according to tradition), and willows of the 
brook’ (Lev. xxiii. 40). With these they were to keep the fe 
(ver. 41). Then it is said they were to dwell in booths, with 
any hint as to how these were to be made. Perhaps (so Kuenen) © 
the branches, &c., in ver. 40 were to be used also in forming 
the bundles (lulabs) of four kinds (myrtles, &c.) which, since early 
times, have been brandished during the feast in the synagogues 
Of this latter custom the Bible gives no explicit account, though it 
may be implied in the above verse of Leviticus, 
as it is written: see on ver. 14. 


" 


‘ig 
‘ 
«a 
. 4 
‘ 






























e, and in the broad place of the gate of Ephraim. And 
1 the congregation of them that were come again out of 


ad not the children of Israel done so. And there was 





__ 16. the roof of his house: flat in Palestine and much used 
ee places of resort of evenings (see 2 Sam. xi. 2; Dan.iv. 26), and 
for even sleeping on in summer. During the feast the Jews still 
i take their meals in the booths as far as weather, means, &c., permit. 
__ courts: most Palestine houses have open courts with wells 
of water on which the inmates depend for their supply, 
___the broad place of the water gate: see on iii. 26, and on 
Ezra x. 9. 
the gate of Ephraim: see on ili. 6 and xii. 39; cf. 2 Kings 
xiv. 13 ; 2 Chron. xxv. 23. It was a little to the south-west of 
_ the corner, and (according to G. A. Smith) south of the line of 
seal repaired under Nehemiah. 
17. all the congregation of them, &c.: render according to 
a Heb., ‘ All the congregation, (even) those who returned,’ &c, 


The word in brackets is inserted to make the sense clear, but in ; 


_ Heb. the whole congregation is equated with those who returned. 
: The unexiled Jews whom the returned exiles found in the home- 
land were relatively so few and unimportant as tobe ignored. See 
on Ezra vi. 21. 

a _ Since the days of Jeshua the son of Nun, &c.: yet we 
es in Ezraiii. 4 of a celebration of the feast almost immediately 

after the arrival of Zerubbabel. There are several ways of re- 
Rebsiciiin what upon the surface and without prejudice looks like 






identifying this Jeshua then with the well-known high-priest who 
Shared in the observance of Ezra iii. 4. All the versions, however, 
have these words, and moreover the whole clause seems based on 
ei Kings xxiii, 22. Jeshua bin-Nun was the inaugurator of a new 
_ era just as was Jeshua the companion of Zerubbabel, and was not 
j eekly to be mentioned. 

Others (Bertheau, &c.) lay great stress on the word so, taking the 
Meicice to mean that in such a manner the Israelites had not ob- 
served this feast from the time of Jeshua bin-Nun. The present 
writer thinks that the Heb. words ‘had not doneso’ mean simply 

4 ‘had not kept the Feast, had not done what had been described ’— 





. _ the celebration of this Feast. It is better to see in the two ac- 





‘of his house, and in ie courts, and in the courts tt 
the house of God, and in the broad place of the water — 


acontradiction. J. D. Mich., Klost., and Sieg. omit the son of Nun, — 





py 



















And they kept the feast seven days ; and on the eighth: 
was a “solemn assembly, according unto the ordinance. — 


Now in the twenty and fourth day of this month the 
* Or, closing festival 


a 
_ counts two different and conflicting traditions handed down along 
different channels, The writer of either of these passages 
~ evidently not seen the other passage. Differences and even con- 
tradictions like these make the record of facts and traditiqme as, 
Ezra-Nehemiah the more valuable and trustworthy. 
gladness: see Lev. xxiii. 40. may 
18. seven days: so Lev. xxiii. 39; Deut. xvi. 1g, 15. ies 
a solemn assembly: this is no part of the Feast proper, = 
the words of this verse imply and as is shown by Num. xxix. 35 (1 
where the sacrifices for the day bear no proportion to those o! ‘ 
daily during the seven days of Tabernacles. See G. B. reek 


p Numbers, 402 ff. (‘A scale of public offerings’). This eighth 


day is mentioned in Lev. xxiii. 34, 39 (P not H) ; Num. xxix. 35 


(late P), but not in Deut. (see xvi. 19-15, XXxXi. 9-12), nor in JE. 
See 1 Kings viii, 65 f. (where the older law is implied) and 
2 Chron. vii. 8-10 (which follows P), Opinion is divided as to 
whether the last great day of the Feast of John vii. 37 is the last 
(i. e. the seventh day) of the Feast proper or the eighth day, the 
_ solemn assembly. But there can be no doubt that it is the se 
day that is meant. ar a 
IX. A 
The contents of this chapter follow quite naturally upon thos 
of that which precedes. When the people through the lin 
of the law come to a perception of the wide divergence bet 1 
their lives and the acknowledged standard one might expect to see 
the demonstrations of grief described in ch. ix. It is of cour 
- assumed that the mourning and weeping of viil. 9-11 and of the 
present chapter are on account of the mixed marriages which the 
reading of the law had painted in the darkest colours. During the 
feasts of the seventh month the mourning people are commend 
to rejoice in accordance with the custom and requirements of 
festival times (viii. 9 ff). But the feast of the month is past and 
gone (Tabernacles) and the mourning is resumed two days late 


(see ver. 1). ‘. 

1-5. Day of public confession. i 
1. the twenty and fourth day (of Tishri) : this would be ty vo 
days after the Feast of Tabernacles had come to a close. his” 
verse shows that chaps. viii-and ix are inseparably conne! 


















F sackcloth, and earth upon them. And the seed of Israel 2 


=f 


children of Israel were assembled with fasting, and with 


separated themselves from all strangers, and stood and 
eonfessed their sins, and the iniquities of their fathers. 


3 as 7? _ NEHEMIAH 9593.34 Cy 229 3 


And they stood up in their place, and read in the book 3 


of the law of the Lorp their God a fourth part of the 


This day is not (with Siegfried) to be identified with the Day of 
Atonement (see Lev. xvi, xxii. 27-32; Num. xx. 7 ff.), which in 
later times was observed on the tenth day of the month, but which 
in Ezra’s time was unknown. 
fasting: see Ezra viii. 21, x. 6. 

_ sackcloth: a sign of penitent sorrow (see 1 Chron. xxi. 
16; Jonah iii. 5, 8; Dan. ix. 3): see on Esther iv. 1. 

_ earth upon them: see 1 Sam. iv. 12; 2 Sam. i. 2, xv. 32; 


- Job ii. x2. 


2. the seed: a comparison with Ezra ix. 2 suggests common 
authorship. In favour of authorship by Ezra is also the fact that the 
word is found most frequently in writing about the time of the 
exile (see Isa. xlv. 25 ; cf. ver. 19; Jer. xxxi. 36, &c.). 

separated themselves: i.e. for the united act of confession 
and prayer. Keil and others think that a general separation from 
‘the heathen is meant. ; 

strangers, i.e. non-Jews : another Heb. word (gé), generally 
translated ‘ sojourners,’ means non-Jews who have settled in Jew- 
ish territory and adopted largely, and in Jate times wholly, the reli- 
gion of the Jews. Notwithstanding what is recorded in Ezra ix f. it 
seems evident that non-Jews joined Jews in the religious assemblies 
of the latter : see on Ezra iii. 3, x. 2, and article ‘Stranger’ in SDB, 

the iniquities of their fathers: see remarkson verses 7-31. 

8. they stood up in their place: render, ‘ they arose (so the 
Heb.) and went to their place,’ i, e. the place appointed for them 
(see on viii. 7). 

and read: who? Not the people, though the Heb. allows this. 
We have here an example of the unnamed (‘ indefinite) subject’ 
so common in. Hebrew which is better rendered into English by 
the passive, as it isthe action and not the agent that is in question: 
see p. 103. Here the Levites must be understood as the readers 
(see viii. 3-8). 

book of the law, &c, : see on villi. 1; cf. verses 4, 5, 7 of the 
present chapter and x. 29, 34. 

a fourth part of the day: i.e. three hours, probably from 


- about 9a.m. to 12 noon, the other three hours following immediately 


upon this. The whole assembly must have stood throughout the 


six hours, except when they prostrated themselves, but see below 


' rance of copyists. Four of the names occur twice (Jes 
















4 Bibped the Lorp their God. Then stood up upon 
stairs of the Levites, Jeshua, and Bani, Kadmiel, 
baniah, Bunni, Sherebiah, Bani, avd Chenani, and c 
with a loud voice_unto the Lorp their God. Then 
5 Levites, Jeshua, and Kadmiel, Bani, Hashabneiah,S 
biah, Hodiah, Shebaniah, avd Pethahiah, said, Stand : 
and bless the Lorp your God from everlasting to ever- 
lasting: and *blessed be thy glorious name, which is — 

® Or, let them bless a 


confessed : see on Ezra x, 2. 
worshipped: lit. ‘ prostrated themselves.’ The verb co 
however, to be used in a general way for ‘to worship’, wha 
the attitude. 
4f. The two lists in these two verses are no doubt one at 
bottom, the confusion arising through the carelessness and igno- — 


Aa 7 
\é 








Kadmiel, Bani, Sherebiah). Siegfried, Torrey, &c., say that 
Chronicler is ’responsible for introducing these names, If s 
one wonders that he did not do his work better—unless his list 
has suffered from transmission. The LXX diverges from the © : 
_ Hebrew considerably in these lists (see below). It seems evident — 
that the names stand for houses, not individuals (cf. Jeshua), al Ea 
we are to think of each house as represented by its living chief. — ua 
| 4. stairs (of the Levites) : Heb. ‘high place.’ It is the wooden — 
platform of viii. 3 that must be meant. en 
Bani: the double occurrence of this name in ver. 4 shows 
how inaccurate the traditional text here is. We should pro! oe 
‘read in one case ‘ Binnu’ (see x. 9, xii.8). The LXX transla 
Bani, Binnui, and Bunni as if all were bené (=sons of), so 
ing the number from eight to five. 

5. Stand: lit., ‘arise.’ The word denotes perhaps merely ; 
summons to do what follows (see on Ezra x. 4), though it may Dee 
its literal meaning’; 3 see onver. 3 (‘worshipped’). < 

bless, &c.: these words resemble closely Psalms whic 
have come down to us (see Ps. xl. 1, 14, Ixxii. 19, evi. 48, 
the references below). See further on verses 6-37. 
blessed be thy glorious name: this rendering is preferable 
~ to that of the margin (see on ver. 3 (indefinite subject)). 

6-37. Esra’s confession and prayer on behalf of the 
we in this a veritable psalm of Ezra’s time and by Ezra ‘him = 
Or is it the work of the Chronicler as Torrey and others 1 hold ? 









- 











“exalted hore all blessing and praise. Thou art the LorD, 6~ — 
even thou alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of 
heavens, with all their host, the earth A all things that 

© are thereon, the seas and all that is in them, and thou 
_ *preservest them alls and the host of heaven worshippeth 


a 

+ Unless there is cogent evidence to the contrary we ought to 

accept the prima facie evidence of the narrative. It is remarkable 

' that although this song makes abundant use of other parts of the 

_ O.T. there is hardly a single case in which it can be proved that 

_ a source so late as the Chronicler, or even as the Priestly Code, — 
has been consulted (see the notes below). If Ezra or Nehemiah or 
a contemporary is not the author it is perfectly clear that the 

_ Chronicler is not, for his-manner does not show itself from begin- 

_ingtoend. The writer is most of all influenced by the Deutero- 

_ nomist, and this agrees with a time between the dominance of the 

- Dand P codes, see p. 18f. The references given below to parallel 

_ passages will be chiefly to parts of the O. T. which this Psalmist 

__ seems to have had in mind. 

' _&. Invocation. 

We ought, with the LXX, to begin this verse with ‘And Ezra 
said.’ This is supported by a comparison with Ezra ix. 6-15. 
Under the priestly influence of a later time these words might 

' well have been omitted, since to lead in prayer and confession is 

__ the prerogative of the priest alone in the P code (see Lev. xxi. 21), 

Thou... LORD... alone: cf. Ps. xxx, 18 and Isa. xliv. 6, | 

i thou hast made : not created, as in Gen. i. 1, ii. 1. 

. heaven. (and) the heaven of heavens: the copula ‘and’ 

'_ must with all the versions be inserted (see Deut. x. 14). The ex- f 
pression ‘ heaven of heavens’ is a Hebrew superlative, and is equi- 

' valent to ‘the highest heaven.’ The idea of a plurality of heavens 
underlies the expression, either three (see 2 Chron, xii. 12) or 
seven (as in the Talmud). 2s 

preservest: lit. ‘ keepest alive.’ : 

9-31. A rapid survey of the nation’s past ; its sins and its mercies. 
With this survey compare Pss. Ixxviii (pre-exilic or exilic), cvi, 
and also Pss. cv, cxl, cxli, though the three last speak only about 

_ God's goodness to Israel at the various stages of the nation’s history, 

_ nothing in them being said of the nation’s sins. This section has 

- for background, as Pss. Ixxviii and cvi, a period of national distress 
—they may all be the product of the same set of events. Here at — 
all events the producing circumstances seem to be the opposition 
offered to the restoration of Judaism and its institutions and the 

_ galling feelings inseparable from bondage to an alien power. 
This Psalm and that in Ezra ix. 6-15 have as much in common 





_ 8 Chaldees, and gavest him the name of-Abraham ; 
___ foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest 











4 thee. Thou art *the tone the God. i! 
Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of 


covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanite, pase 
Hittite, the Amorite,and the Perizzite,and the Jebusite, 
* Or, O Lorp 


__as common authorship justifies us in expecting, but the differences — 
are sufficient to prove that they were uttered on different occasions. — | 
To the modern mind it seems passing strange to find in this” 
Psalm, in Ezra ix. 6-15, and in many Psalms in the Psalter, one — 
_ generation of men apologizing to God for the sins of their fore- 

fathers who lived hundreds of years before, and seeking Di 
pardon for these sins. But to the people of these times there i is 
incongruity in all this, for the individual was lost in the nation, 
whatever merit or demerit attached to the latter belonged as well 
to the separate members of the nation. "We have a modificati 

of the same thought (the solidarity of the race) in the old doctrine 
of original sin. ~ 


qf. God's covenant with Abraham, and through him with thenation. 
7. who didst choose Abram: in Deut. vii. 8 and x. 15 God | 
is said to choose Israel because He loved their ancestors, In the 
present passage God is said to choose Abram. 
_ . Ur of the Chaldees: see Gen. xv. 7 (E); ef. Gen. xi. 25, Br. 
gavest him the name of Abraham: see Gen. xvii. 5(P; a 
al also have had this). 
8. (found his heart) faithful, i. e. believing (see Gen. xv. 6 GE)5: 
ef, Ps, xxviii, 8; 1 Sam. iii. 20; Gal. iii. g). 
madest a covenant with him: sce Gen. xv. 18-21 (JE) and 
ef. Gen. xvii. 2 ff. (P). 1% 
the Canaanite, &c.: this list is abridged from Gen. xy. © 
19-21 (JE) or from Deut. vii. 1. On Canaanite and Amorite see om 
Ezra ix. 1. Amorites and Canaanites represent the two most im-— 
portant ethnic elements in the pre-Israelitish population of Pales- ‘ 
tine, and originally no other native races seemed to have been men-_— 
tioned, but later writers swelled the list for didactic purpo 
magnifying the conquest which God enabled the nation to achieve. ee 
If the literal meaning of such lists is pressed it must be admitte 
that the longest of them (x Gen. xv. 19-21) is very incomplete, 
as it embraces only tribes west of the Jordan and south of the q 
upper reaches of that river. 
Hittite : very important remains of the civilization of this pe 
ple have been found in recent years in Asia Minor and elsewh 
proving that at one time they were numerous and powerfial en 





ae 
vs 


¥ 


¥ 
‘ 
3 
’ 










Be 
a 


_ NEHEMIAH 9. 9-13. C; 233 


and the Grrachite, even to give it unto his seed, and 


hast performed thy words ; for thou art righteous. And 9g 


thou sawest the affliction of our fathers in Egypt, and 
heardest their cry by the Red Sea; and shewedst signs to 
and wonders upon Pharaoh, and on all his servants, and 
on all the people of his land; for thou knewest that they 
dealt proudly against them; and didst get thee a name, 
as it is this day. And thou didst divide the sea before 11 
them, so that they went through the midst of the sea on 
the dry land; and their pursuers thou didst cast into the. 


depths, as a stone into the mighty waters. Moreover 12 


thou leddest them in a pillar of cloud by day; and ina 
pillar of fire by night, to give them light in the way 
wherein they should go. ‘Thou camest down also upon 13 
mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and ~ 


“to contest the supremacy of Western Asia with Assyria: see 


A. H. Sayce, The Hittites. 
Jebusite: G. A, Smith denies that there ever was a city 
called Jebus (=Jerusalem, or a part of it): the existence of 
a city of that name being inferred from the tribal name. 
for thou art righteous: because thou hast kept Thy promise 
(see Deut. xxxii, 4). : 
9-11. In Egypt and the deliverance out of it. The long interval — 
between Abraham and the settlement in Egypt is passed over in 
silence. 
9. thou sawest, &c.: see Exod. iii. 7(J). Cf. Exod. xiv. 10 


 Q)3 xv.4. 


10. and shewedst signs: see Deut. vi. 22. 
dealt proudly: see Exod. xviii. 12 (J), xvi. 14 (E); Deut. i. 


43, Xvii. 13. 


didst get thee a name: see Exod. ix. 16 (J); cf. Isa. Lxiii, 
12; Jer. xxxli. 20. as itis this day: see Jer. xliv. 2. 
11. thou didst divide, &c.: see Exod. xv. 4 (J). 
12-21. In the wilderness. : 
12. pillar of clond .. . pillar of fire : see ver. 19 and Exod. xiii. ~ 


- 2af.(J); Num. xiv. 14 (JE); Deut. i. 33; cf. Ps. Ixxviii. 14, cv. 39. 


13. See Exod. xix. 18, 20. 
- Sinai (J, P) and Horeb (E, D) are simply different names in 
different sources for the same mountain. The old view is that © 


_ Horeb was the name of the group or range and Sinai that of one 


x 


14 and commandments : 


a 





§- 






- gavest them right judgements and true oP xe 


of the mountains in it; but biblical usage is against any distinc ion 
being made. <7 
judgements: better ‘ordinances’: see on i. 7. tA 
true laws: Heb. ‘laws of faithfulness,’ i.e. laws in harmony — 
with God’s revealed purpose to do good to His people: not — 
capricious, much less inimical. We are not sharply to differ- 


» entiate the terms grouped in this verse for the Divine legislation ; : 


they stand rather for different aspects of the same thing, just as in ny 


’ Ps. cxix (see Introd. to, Century Bible) the Divine word is expressed © ee 


in each stanza by eight terms indicative of as many view-points. — 
14. holy sabbath: the epithet ‘holy’ seems to imply that — 
this institution was now regarded as a religious one (see below). 


_ We have in this verse what is probably the earliest post-exilic — 


reference to the Sabbath—the allusions in Ezekiel (xx. 12, 20, Se 
&c.) belonging to the exile itself. In pre-exilic times the © 
references seem to show that the Sabbath was a rest day for 
man and for beast, a day for relaxation and recreation, and not ~ 
directly intended for worship or religious work : see Exod. xxiii. _ 
12 (JE), xxxiv. 21 (J); Deut. v. 12-15 ; Amos viii. 4; Hos. ii. 11. 
It was during the exile, when the great feasts could not be kept 
owing to separation from the Temple, that the Sabbath came to be 
set apart as aday for the studying of the Scripture and for sacred 
song and prayer. The above is, however, an @ priori conclusion, — 
but it is almost certainly in accordance with the facts. After the ” 
return, when the Sabbath does loom into view, it is, as here, 
a ‘holy’ day; yet for some time after the return, and in some 
circles during the exile, this day does mot seem to have com- 
manded much, if any, notice. It is not once spoken of in Isaiah, 
not even in the second part, except in passages assigned to the 
time of Nehemiah (vi. 2, lviii. 13 f.). There is not a word about — 
it in Haggai, Zechariah, Ezra, Psalms, Proverbs, or Job, or even 


as 
- 


' Genesis, except in the account of its institution, which i is late (P). 


Ezra recognizes its claims in the present passage, though in no 
other extant words of his, and Nehemiah made its observance — 
a matter of great consequence: see Neh. xiii. 13-21, with which 
must go Isa. lIviii. 13f. and Jer. xvii. 19-21, as of the same 
period and even movement. 

In the P code and connected parts of the O.T. the Sabbath is 
a religious institution (see Exod. xxxi. 12-17 (P); Num, xxviii, 
gf.). It is quite clear that the Israelitish Sabbath is not a replica N 
of the Babylonian Sabattu, if even the two had at all any genitic 


connexion. The Babylonian institution was a eo 
ogee eh 

















4 ic them. But they and our fathers dealt proudly, I 
and hardened their neck, and hearkened not to thy com- 
" mandments, and refused to obey, neither were nine 








_ times i The Babylonian term aahe was spied to thes ch 
fifteenth of the month only, and was identical, at least originally, 7 













with the Full Moon Festival!. The 7th, 14th, "roth, 21st and 28th 
days of the month in the Babylonian calendar were unlucky days — 
~ (ukhulgal) for certain acts, not rest or sacred days at all’, See 
| Meinhold, Sabbat und Woche, 1905; A. R. Gordan, The Early 
23 Traditions of Genesis, 216 ff., 1907, and review by the present 
writer in Review of Theology and Philosophy, vol. iii, p. 689 ff. 12 
; commandments: see on ver. 13 and cf. i. 7 and Ezra vii. II 
for similar combinations of synonyms. 
_ 15. bread from heaven: see Exod. xvi. 4 (JE) ; cf. Ps. cv. 40. 
In Ps, Ixxviii. 25 it is called (in a corrected text), ‘the bread of 
angels’; see on ver. 20 (‘manna ”). As regards the hunger and — Ms 
thirst of the people see Deut. xxviii. 48. 
goin to possess: see Deut. ix. 5. 
__ lifted up thine hand: i.e. (as in A.V.) ‘sworn,’ here an 
_ -anthropomorphism, for the idiom (common in many languages) 
rests on the custom still widely prevalent (as in Scotland) of 
: i pointing to Deity as witness when an oath is taken: see Exod. — 
BY: vi. 8, &c. ; Num. xiv. 28 f., 33. For the existence of the practice © a 
“in Africa See Johnstone, Journal Anthrop., Institute, xxxii, p. 264, 
16. (they) and (our fathers): render ‘ even’; it is, thew 
_ explicative conjunction waw, corresponding to a similar use oe ia 
the Greek xai and the Latin et. . 
dealt proudly : see on ver. Io. We 
hardened their neck: as animals refusing to bear the yoke : : 
_ see verses 17, 29 and Deut, x. 16; Jer. vii. 26. Cf. Exod. xxxii. 9. 
17. refused to obey: see Jer. iv. 6. Note the heaped-up 
charges in this verse. 


1 See Pinches, PSBA., 1904, 51 ff.; Zimmern, KAT.®, 592; 
ZDMG., 1904, 200 ff., 458 ff. 5 Benzinger, Arch.™, 338 ff.; C. H. W.- 1h 
ns, ezeoritor, 1906, ii. 433 ; Driver, Genesis, 34 if a 
































s 














; ‘pardon, gracious and full of compassion, slow to anger, oe 
18 and plenteous in mercy, and forsookest them not. Yea, . 
-~ when they had made them a molten calf, and said, This 


is thy God that brought thee up out of Egypt, and had — 


19 wrought great provocations; yet thou in thy manifold 
mercies forsookest them not in the wilderness: the pillar — 
of cloud departed not from over them by day, to lead — 
them in the way ; neither the pillar of fire by night, to — 
shew them light, and the way wherein they should go. — 


20 Thou gavest also thy good spirit to instruct them, and — i 


~ * The Sept. has, and appointed a captain to return to their bondage — 
in Egypt. See Num. xiv. 4. > Heb. a God of forgivenesses. — 


wonders: Heb. ‘ outstanding acts,’ used especially for what 

God did for His people, whether in nature or in history ; see Exod. 

iii. ‘20 (J), &c. The word is very common in the Psalms, but, 

though common also in JE, it is absent from P. 

and in their rebellion, &c.: render (see RiVm.), ‘and 
appointed a head (or leader), so that (under his leadership) they _ 
might return to their bondage in-Egypt.’ No change in the text _ 

is necessary for the above translation except a trivial . one on 
a single Hebrew word. on 

Bs appointed a captain (lit., ‘a head’) : so the Greek versions — 

_ (though different Greek words: are used in Lue, and LXX). Haupt, 
following an Assyrian idiom, renders ‘ they made head,’ i.e. ‘they — 
resisted.” This, however, is not Hebrew. Bertheau and Stade 
render ‘ they turned their head’ (‘to return,’ &c.), Loe 

their bondage : see on Ezra ix. 9. 
; a God ready to pardon: cf. Dan, £5) \which>sesa aa 
depend on the present passage as being the older. Fel 

For the epithets applied in this verse to God see reference Bibles. _ 

18. See Exod. xxxii. 4 (E), 8 (JE). Po 

wrought great provocations: the Hebrew means ‘they 
exhibited great contempt’ (for God). The noun occurs besides 
only in ver. 26 andin Ezek. xxxv. 12, 

19. to shew them light, and the way: render (omitting 
‘with the versions “and ’), ‘to show them light in the way,’ &e. 7 
- 20. tay good spirit: see Num. xi. 17, 23-29(E); 3; ef. Ps. exlii 
‘to; Isa. Ixi. 11. i 












3 Pier water for their thirst. Yea, forty eis didst thou 
> sustain them in the wilderness, and they lacked nothing ; 
‘their clothes waxed not old, and their feet swelled not. 
_ Moreover thou gavest them kingdoms and peoples, * which 


thou didst allot after their portions: so they possessed 


" the land of Sihon, even the land of the king of Heshbon, 
and the land of Og king of Bashan. Their children also 
_ multipliedst thou as the stars of heaven, and broughtest 


a1 


_ them into the land, concerning which thou didst say to 


3 ® Or, and didst distribute them into every corner 


manna: see on ver. 15. What is here said of the supply of ~ 


‘manna and water has its source in Num. xi. 6-9 (JE), not as 


the same two sources seem combined. Exod. xvi. 25 gives — 


a popular etymology of the word manna (‘what is it’), — 


3 ver. 15 in Exod. xvi. 4 (JE): see Ps. Ixxviii. 17 ff., where 


which Semitic philology shows to be incorrect. The manna of 
; Scripture is generally identified with those thick drops which in 
_ May and June exude of nights from the tamarisk tree through 
a punctures caused by insects. They are gathered by the Bedouin 
Arabs of the Sinaitic Peninsula and greatly relished. Another 









original manna. In any case here, as in Exod. xvi, Num. xi, 


- the supply really miraculous. 
+21. See Deut. ii. 7, viii. 4, xxix. 4. 


ss, _ walking). 

_ 22-25. The Conquest of Canaan. 

22. after their portions: Heb., ‘according toa corner’ (Lev. 
' XIX. 17, 27), or ‘according to a portion’ (* corner’) of territory 


view is that a kind of stone lichen largely eaten by Arabs is the 
’ Ps, Ixxviii. 24, and John vi. 31, manna is regarded as due to 


a special act on God’s part, and something in the circumstances ~ 
“under which the wilderness manna was supplied may have made 


ig (their feet) swelled not: rendered ‘blistered not’ ( (through 


(only in Num. xxiv. 17, and then doubtfully). Better with EXX, - 


_ Vulg. omit the clause: it is perhaps a dittograph of the last part 


of the preceding words. Luc. and Syr. give quite different — 


renderings from each other and from that of the E.VV. 
'__ possessed: see Deut. i. 21. 





dittograph, the same word written twice by mistake. The 
obviousness of-this is seen in the Hebrew only. 
As 22. See Gen. xxii. 17 (JE); Deut. i. ro. 





even the land of: omit (with LXX, Vulg.); it is an obvious © 






children went in and possessed the land, and thou 
_duedst before them the inhabitants of the land, 
_ Canaanites, and gavest them into their hands, with their . 
_ kings, and the peoples of the land, that they might do 
25 With them as they would. And they took fenced cities, 
and a fat land, and possessed houses full of all good _ 
_ things, cisterns hewn out, vineyards, and oliveyards, 
and fruit trees in abundance: so they did eat, and were 
filled, and became fat, and delighted themselves in thy 
26 great goodness. Nevertheless they were disobedient, and 
_ rebelled against thee, and cast thy law behind their back, 
and slew thy prophets which testified against them to 
turn them again unto thee, and they wrought great pro- 
27 vocations. Therefore thou deliveredst them into the hae : 


24. Begin this verse with and thou subduedst, &c., the pre: 
ceding words- (absent from the LXX) anticipating nie 
what follows. 

thou subduedst... the Canaanites. There is a word-pla 
in the Hebrew which in English is lost, the noun and verb havin 
. the same root letters, as if in English one said ‘ he subjected 
; _ subjects’ (of the German Emperor). 
i 25. See Deut. vi. 1of., vili. 7-9. 
; became fat (i. e. sensuous) : see Deut. xxxii. 15, A a 

26-29. Period of the Judges. : 

26. they were disobedient: the Hebrew verb (= to be 
refractory) is quite common in Deuteronomy (see ix. Ts 245 &e.). 

cast thy law behind their back: see 1 Kings xiv.9; Ezek. 
Sue Rx. 35. 
slew thy prophets: see I Kings xviii. 4, 13, xix. 10; 
: 2 Chron. xxiv. 2of.; Matt. v. 12, xxiii. 209 ff. ; Luke xi. 47, xiii. 
. 33 ff. ; Acts vii. 32; 1 Thess. ii.15; Heb. xi. 32 f. 
which testified, &c.: a favourite expression of D and his 
school (see Deut. iv. 26, &c.); never found in P or his circle 
(Chronicles, &c.). ' 
provocations: see on ver. 18. 


27f. Here we have the recurring pragmatism of Judges—sins, — 
repentance, deliverance—repeated in that order (see Ju aN 


mor ff.), e — 


iw 







“heardest from heaven ; and according to thy mavifald 
“mercies thou gavest them saviours who. saved them out — 
of | the hand of their adversaries. But after they had. 28 
_ rest, they did evil again before thee: therefore leftest 
thou them i in the hand of their enemies, so that they had | 
“the dominion over them: yet when they retin, ange 















d testifiedst against them, that thou mightest ee 2 
yem again unto thy law: yet they dealt proudly, 
and hearkened not unto thy commandments, but sinned we : 
: "against thy judgements, (which if a man do, he shall live 
in 2 and “withdrew the shoulder, and hardened theing . 























8 “ned they gave a stubborn shoulder. ‘- . ‘< 


27. adversaries ... distressed ...trouble: the Hebrew 
basis in all these words i is identical, so that the Hebrew exhibits 
play on words which in a translation is missed ; cf. ‘ adversaries | 
. . treated adversely . . . adverse (circumstances). K 

- saviours: the Hebrew word (the root of which is ane 
n ‘Joshua,’ or ‘ Jesus’) stands here for the judges, as in J veel 
. 9, 15, &c.; cf. Judges ii. 16 for the corresponding verb 
_ (‘delivered ’). e, 

28. when they returned and cried: render (in accordance 
h Heb. idiom), ‘when they again cried.’ 

9. commandments ... judgements: see on i. 7. 


_ 30f. Period of the prophets. ees 
30. didst thon bear with them: render, ‘didst thou con- 
‘tinue to be kind to them.’. The Hebrew verb=‘ to draw out,’ ‘to 
-extend,’ and with the zoun denoting ‘kindness’ understood, 
ans as above. We have the full phrase in Ps. xxxvi, Io and — 
. 12, and in Jer. xxxi. 3. aa 2) 
_ testifiedst: see on ver. 26. 

by thy spirit: see Zech, vii, 12 and cf. 2 Ghissiv: xxiv. -s08 fi, 
ay 2 Pet, i, 21. : 





_~ art just in all that is come upon us; for thou hast | 


31 lands. Nevertheless in thy manifold mercies thou 


240 NEHEMIAH | 





fore gavest thou them into the hand of the pi 3 


not make a full end of them, nor forsake them ; ra 
32 art a gracious and merciful God. Now therefore, our 
God, the great, the mighty, and the terrible God, who” 
keepest covenant and mercy, let not all the travail seem 
little before thee, that hath come upon us, on our kings, | 
on our princes, and on our priests, and on our prophets,” 
and on our fathers, and on all thy people, since the time © 
33 of the kings of Assyria unto this day. Howbeit thou : 
34 truly, but we have done wickedly: neither have our kings, 
our princes, our priests, nor our fathers, kept thy law, 





hand: often in the O. T. =‘ power.’ ang 

peoples of the lands: see on Ezra iv. 4, ix. 1. 

' 81. thou: the Greek versions seem to have followed a text ¥ 
in which the Hebrew pronoun is for emphasis separately ex~ 
pressed as well as implied in the verb: ‘thou, (even) thou didst 
‘not make.’ Guthe and Bertholet adopt this. ~ 

didst not make a full end: see Jer. iv. 27, v. 10, 18; Eaek, . 

_ xi, 13, XX. 17. 

32-37. Prayer that God may avert the punishment which the 
nation so richly deserves. 

32. our God, the great, &c.: see oni. 5. 

travail: the Hebrew word has in it especially the idea of 
weariness : see Exod. xviii. 8, &c. 

princes: see on Ezraix.1. The Hebrew word here is that 
used by Ezra, not that common in Nehemiah (see on Neh. ii. 16), 

since the time of the kings of Assyria: see on Ezrai ix. 7 
and cf. 2 Kings xv. 29, xvii. 23. 

33. just: see on Ezra ix. 15. Note the ethical standard by 
which God and man are equally jidged. The blame for Israel’s 
suffering is on Israel, not on God. Whence came so lofty a con- 
ception of Deity to this simple people? 

(hast dealt) truly: ‘faithfully’ would better convey the 
sense of the Hebrew. God has not departed from the word 
He has spoken cy 

34. kept (lit. ‘done’) thy law: the Hebrew expression oc 
here only. re 


” 







* 3 eee ~ 
<—S : > — Pp 


"NEHEMIAH Ee ok es 






Biter chearkenedl unto thy commandments and thy testi- 
_ monies, wherewith thou didst testify against them. For 35” 
' they have not served thee in-their kingdom, and in thy 
_ great goodness that thou gavest them, and in the large - 
"and fat land which thou gavest before them, neither turned 
ey from their wicked works. Behold, we are servants 36 
_ this day, and as for the land that thou gavest unto our 
fathers to eat the fruit thereof and the good thereof, 
Pbchold, we are servants in it. And it yieldeth much in- 37 
crease unto the kings whom thou hast set over us because 
‘of our sins: also they have power over our bodies, and 


— Ts 





nor hearkened, &c. : a Deuteronomic expression: see Dent. _ 

- Xxxli. 16; 2 Kings xvii. 5. > 

P thy testimonies, &c.* render, ‘thy solemn admonitions 

' wherewith thou didst solemnly admonish them.’ The Hebrew 

' noun denotes strictly ‘a warning given in the presence of wit- 
nesses.’ It is one of the eight synonyms for ‘the word of God’ in 

_ Ps. cxix (see Introd. to in Century Bible). The phrase found here 

- _ occurs besides in the Psalms and almost exclusively in Deuteronomy. 

35. they: in Hebrew this pronoun is emphatic, the reference 

__ being to the kings and princes in contradistinction to the ‘ thou” 
and ‘we’ of ver. 33. 

# in their kingdom: i.e. in the time when they had an inde- 

_ pendent kingdom in contrast to the state of things now prevailing, 
see ver. 36. 

3 goodness: see ver. 25. 

; wicked works: see Zech. i. 4 

36. servants: the same Hebrew word is rendered ‘bond- 

_ men’ in Ezra ix. 9 (see on). 

i the land, &c.: they are now servants in the land which 

_ God gave to them and in which, if they had served God, they 

~ would have been still masters. 

37. it yieldeth much increase in the way of taxation to the 
_ Persian kingdom. The Hebrew noun (=‘ increase’) denotes often 

: ‘land produce’ (Lev. xxv. 22, &c.). 

. (unto) the kings: Ezra ‘and Nehemiah had both been com- 
missioned by one of them to return to their native home to restore 
Jewish religious institutions. 

because of our sins: our subjection to others is but the fruit : 
’ of our refusing to subject ourselves to Thy will. 
our bodies =‘ our persons’ (according to Semitic usage). _ If 


E R2 2 
sx > 









“Service (agricultural, military). 
our cattle : ‘or they will distrain upon our cattle.’ 
at their pleasure: Oriental taxation is very much what 
tuler or tax-collector wishes it to be. 
_~ The prayer ends abruptly in the M.T., and it seems q 
evident that in the original draft there was a petition that God 
_ might deliver them out of their present distress, or at least 

~ suitable ending. We should not, ‘however, be too confident a 
_imposing modern literary canons on ancient literature. ey <2 


IX: 38-X. There has been much discussion as to the ition 
of chapter x (in¢luding always the last verse of the preceding 
chapter) in the Book of Nehemiah. Of late years the majority « Os 

recognized O.T. scholars agree that Neh. vii. 73°—x belongs to the - 

history of Ezra and his work, and ought to have been added to the 
book called ‘ Ezra’ or incorporated into it. So Ewald, Well- 

-__hausen, Schrader, Klostermann, Baudissin, Budde, Ryssel, Bertho- 

pee iet. But there has been an inclination on the part of some scholars 

__ to separate ch, x and vii. 73°-ix, as is done by Kosters (who c 


















a 


oN SAE SU 


oe 


oe 
= 


_ ~* that the events of ch. x followed those of ch. xiii), by Winckler, — 

and by Bertholet (who, ascribing vii. 73°-ix to the Ezra ayes 
---—+iholds that ch. x belongs to the Nehemiah memoirs). The 

; a. reasons put forward by Bertholet for his view are these! ; 





a, Ch. ix does not come to a complete end, so that in a 
. Ehere i is a break in the connexion of events (see on ix. 37). i 
_—s«s 2, In viii. 1-ix. 5 itis the third person that is used (leaving out 


of account the prayer in ix. 6-37, which. is—Bertholet thinks—no~ 
original part of the section (but why not ?)). In ch. x, on the con- 
trary, the first person reappears. It may be said in reply that in — 
viii-ix. 5 we have a narrative of Ezra’s doings, in which the third 
person is very suitably employed ; whereas in ch. x we. have a 
verbatim copy of the obligation entered into. Moreover, we- find» 
_ the first person in ix. 32-37, which cannot be so lightly set So 
as an interpolation as is done by this writer. 

oy 3. At the head of the signatories in x. 1 ff. is the name of Nehe- 
_.-__— miah, whereas Ezra is not mentioned from the beginning of that 
Mg chapter to its close. 

DB ime But most scholars, including Bertholet, admit that the name ' 
“Fra Nehemiah is a late insertion in viii. 9, and there is very good 
r reason for so regarding it in x. 1.. Following his name is that of 
_—-—s Zedekiah, of whom we know nothing at all unless he was fhe 
; king of that name. 















1 See Commentary, p. 75 f 







































- days of Ezra, signing on behalf of the house (clan). If this view 
_be correct Ezra would not need separate mention, as he would be 
included in ‘ Seraiah’ (see x..2). 

Some of the grounds on which Kosters places x after xiii are 
_ these}: 

i. X. 32-39 implies xiii. ro-13. This, of course, is a question 


for the support of Levites and priests mentioned in x. 37 ff. must, 
__ ifonce made, have continued in operationeven during Nehemiah’s 
absence. In that case the withholding of the tithe from the Levites 


allotted one-tenth of the Levites’ tithe (x. 37ff.). But the Levites 


4 te horne i in mind that our narrative is defective, and what. one desi- 
_ derates in cases like this might have formed part of a fuller history 


‘in numbers and in power very rapidly, the Levites losing in influ- 
ence and popularity. It is not at all unlikely that the priests, 


"to let the latter have what was necessary for their maintenance. 
‘See further on ch. xiii. 1-3, &c. 

2. Kosters maintains further that the reference to the Sabbath 
in xiii, 15-22 is older than that in x. 32. Could the desecration 


—§ 


_ fFeferred to the solemn, signed covenant? All this is a prior 
; "reasoning and depends for its cogency very much upon the indi- 
vidual to whom it is addressed. | We know that the covenant to 
_ separate from strange wives was violated several times, yet we 
shave no record that in each case the violated covenant is cited. 
Kosters refers to other parts of ch. x in which ch. xiii is pre- 
“Supposed (see below notes on the two chapters). 


' nizes that on neither side of the controversy is the evidence very 


_ g2ff., and x, cf. verses 29, &c.). 





1 See Wiederherstellung, 64 ff. 
Sa eee 


oe feck for persons, each house being pie oe by its head, ne 
who signed as such. The house to which Nehemiah belonged 

- would be in Jerusalem, and there is no difficulty in conceiving of — 
_ its chief, or at least the principal member, in Jerusalem in thelater 


of probability only, and to the present writer the contrary seems. 
' the likelier supposition. Kosters assumes that the arrangements 


Bs ‘must have caused loss to the priests as well, since they were — 
alone complain, not the priests (xiii. ro). It must, however, be 
which is largely lost. Then again, the priests after the exile grew _ 


__after the events of ch. x, took matters intotheir own hands, received _ 
the tithes payable in the first instance to the Levites, and refused 





R of the Sabbath implied in the former passage have taken place after — 
pe the stringent undertaking in x. 33? Would not Nehemiah have 





_ i. The use of the first person plural in both chapters (see ix. | 


In favour of connecting ch. x immediately with the preceding one 
are the following considerations, though the present writer recog- 






ss te . 

* PS ee 
"38 distress. “And b yet for all this we make a sure ? 
and write it; and our princes, our Levites, and 
“priests, 4 oak unto it. eas 


* (Ch. x. 1 in Heb.} > Or, because of ¢ Or, jaiuiflle | 
4 Heb. are at the sealing. ~ 





2. One might expect the reading of the law and the confession — 
and prayer which followed to lead to an attempt at the reorganiza- 
tion of the society and a restoration of its laws and institutions. — 

The series of laws and regulations mentioned in ch. x are such as _ 
would be likely now to come into existence. The references tosuch ~ 
laws in ch. xiii aresporadic, and seem due to their neglect during the 
absence of Nehemiah. Ch. x contains a programme for the future, 
and one sees in this a natural fitness. The solemn undertaking of — 
x. 29 accords well with the deep earnestness which pervades ix. 6ff, 

3- The arrangement in xiii. 1 ff. to separate from Ammonites and — 
Moabites is more likely to have been subsequent tothe putting away — 
of strange wives, this last being the first and chief concern of the — 
returned community. m 


ix. 38-x. 27. The signatories to the covenant. 4 
ix. 38. This verse belongs (as in the M.T., not so in Luther’s 
_ Bible as Ryle inaccurately says) to ch. x. It is with this verse 
‘that the section concerning the signing of the covenantopens. 
yet for all this: render, ‘on account of all this." The refer- 
ence in this must be to a lost paragraph, which recited the causes 
and terms of the covenant. There is nothing in the foregoing 
confession and prayer to supply a starting-point for this verse. : 
- sure covenant: the Heb. word (=‘something firm’) pres 
only here and in xi. 23, and is cognate to the adjective (— : 
transliterated ‘ Amen’ (see on v. 13). Though the Sa 
used for covenant (see ix. 8) does not occur here, the verb techni- 
cally used for making a covenant (=‘to cut,’ as in Greek, Latin, 
&c., on account of the ratification by sacrifice, see Gen. xv) is found 
here, showing that some kind of covenant is meant, though there 
can be no certainty on the matter. Perhaps the regular word for 
covenant (devit) is avoided, as it almost invariably describes what 
God does, and not, as here and xl, 23, what man undertakes to do. — 
write it; and our princes, &c.: render (to end of verse), 
‘and our princes, our Levites (and) our priests wroté their names: 
to what was sealed.’ The only change in the Hebrew is the 
omission of one consonant (= ‘ and *) which has been written twice 
by mistake, or it may have been accidentally omitted before ‘our - 
priests’ (see rendering above). 
The E.VV. make no sense of this verse. 
The princes, &c., attached their names to the covenant, which 
was afterwards sealed. and put safely away in a jar or other 
“ Siete 








ow those that sealed were, Nehemiah the Tirshatha, 1 
the son of Hacaliah, and Zedekiah; Seraiah, Azariah, 2 y 
_ Jeremiah ; Pashhur, Amariah, Malchijahy; Hattush, She- : ya 
_ baniah, Malluch ; ; Harim, Meremoth, Obadiah; Daniel, - 
-Ginnethon, Baruch; Meshullam, Abijah, Mijamin;7 
‘Maaziah, Bilgai, Shemaiah : these were the priests: And 8, S 























receptacle. Babylonian contracts upon clay tablets have been 

found at Nippur! and at other places, enclosed in clay scale 
_ envelopes, on the outside of which was a duplicate of the contract 
to be consulted when necessary, the sealed and signed contract” oo 


~ te be consulted only in cases of emergency (see Jer. xxxii. 11), On 
ry a 
" sealing =signing in the Orient, see on Esther iii. 10. see: 


+X. 1. those that sealed: render, ‘on what was (afterwards) 
sealed were (the following names) Nehemiah,’ &c. If, with the Soe 
_ Hebrew, we read the plural ‘ things’ sealed, we must understand _ ee 
_ that the signers attached their names to the original covenant and © : 
_ its duplicate (see on ix. 38). 

The names of those who signed are arranged in classes. It is to 
be borne in mind that in these lists we have names of the houses — 
_the representatives of which signed the document, not the names © 
__ of individuals. 3 
r Nehemiah the Tirshatha...Zedekiah: the list is headed 
_ by the signatories of Nehemiah’s house (i.e. the house to which — 
3 belonged, the Nehemiah soon to play a great part) and the royal — 
~ house of Zedekiah. So interpreted the words need cause no diffi- — 
culty. Many futile attempts to identify this Zedekiah have been 
‘made. -Probably, however, this part of ver. 2 is a late interpola- — 
_ tion, due to a desire to introduce those two great names. Nehe- 

~ miah’s official title is pekhah (=governor), not Tirshatha (see on _ 
Besa, 9 and Ezra ii. 67). : x - 


2-8. Priestly houses. This list has twenty-one names as against 
twenty-two in xii. I- -3- Moreover, sixteen names are identical in 
s both lists. We read in Ezraii. (36-39) of only four priestly houses rsa = 
> as having returned with Zerubbabel. But the number and influ- — as 
ence of the priests grew rapidly and continuously after the 

exile. Nie 
ES 2. Seraiah: Ezra belonged to this house, so that his name is 

really included in the list. 
Es 9-13. Levitical houses, Seventeen are mentioned as against 
two in Ezra ii, 40 (see on), Levites increased, as did priests, 
after the return, though they gradually came to be more and more _ 

























the subordinates of the priests (see xii. 8). 






1 Peters, Nippur, ii. 198. | x 





‘the Levites : namely, Jeshua the son “oft “An 
to of the sons of Henadad, Kadmiel; and their breth 
11 Shebaniah, Hodiah, Kelita, Pelaialt Hanan ; Mica, — 


12, 13 Rehob, Hashabiah ; Zaccur, Sherebiah, Shebaniah ; Ho- — 


14 diah, Bani, Beninu. The chiefs of the people : Parosh 
15 Pahath- ital Elam, Zattu, Bani; Bunni, Azgad, Bebai; — 


-¥,17,18 Adonijah, Bigvai, Adin; Ater, Hezekiah, “Amaie’ ; Hodiah, 


19, 20 Hashum, Bezai ; 


Hariph, Anathoth, *Nobai; Magpiash, — 


21, 22 Meshullam, Hears Meshezabel, Zadok, Jaddua; Pelatiah, 
23, 24 Hanan, init Fidseas; Hananiah, Hasshub ; Hallo- 
25 hesh, Pilha, Shobek ; Rehum, Hashabliah; Manseiaiesl 
26,27 and Ahiah, Hanan, Anan; Malluch, Harim, Baanah. 


28 And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the — 
porters, the singers, the Nethinim, and all they that had 


separated themselves from the peoples of the lands unto 
® Another reading is, Webat. 








9. namely: the one Heb. consonant (waw) so translated must ; 
(with the versions and some thirty Heb. MSS.) be omitted. 


14-27. Lay houses. Forty-one are named, twenty-one of them . 
(verses 15-21) occurring almost completelyin Ezra ii (and Neh. vii). 
Of the rest (verses 22-27) some are mentioned in ch. iil. 


28f. The individual members of the houses associate themselves 
with their representatives, endorsing their action, It is individuals 
that are now indicated by priests, Levites, &c., the houses having 
been previously so named. 2 

28. porters...singers...Nethinim: named as distinct from 
the Levites (see vii. 43 ff., Ezra ii. 4o ff.). To the Chronicler all 
are equally Levites (see 1 Chron. xxiii. 3-5, &c.). So Smend, 


Baudissin, &c., against Torrey', who denies the usage described — 


above, not on inadequate grounds as the present writer thinks. 
Nethinim: see on Ezra ii. 43. 


all they that had separated themselves, i. e. such as had not” 


lived in Babylon, home-staying Jews who had complied with the 
new law (see on Ezra vi. 21). Meyer? holds that proselytes, non- 
Jewish converts to Judaism from-the heathen around, are meant, 
but Ezra’s and Nehemiah's principles left no room in Judaism for 
such converts. 


1 Composition, &c., p. 22 f. 2 Die Entstdalah &c., p. te ot 


e 2 ie Pot 








“every one that had fnowledgb’ and mecedons : there 29° 
clave to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a oF 
curse, and into an oath, to walk in God’s law, which was ¥ 
given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and 

do all the commandments of the Lorp our Lord, and his 
judgements and his statutes ; and that we would not give 30 
our daughters unto the ean of the land, nor take 
their daughters for our sons: and if the peoples of the gr 
and bring ware or any victuals on the sabbath day to ~ 
sell, that we would not buy of them on the sabbath, or © 





peoples of the lands: see on Ezra iii. 3. 
wives...sons... daughters: see on viii. 2. 
29. nobles, lit. ‘powerful ones,’ the word in iil. 5 (see on) not 
that sorendered in ii. 16 (see on). Here the word stands for the 
persons who signed the sealed covenant on behalf of the houses 
they represented. 
entered into a curse: the same noun (accompanied by the 
causative form of the verb here) is translated ‘oath’ in Ezek, xvil.13, 
andi in fact means both (‘he brought him under,’ i.e.into‘anoath’), 
the oath being one of imprecation, which amounts to a curse. 
‘The use of a following word meaning distinctly ‘ oath’ shows that 
“it is the imprecatory side of the first noun that is here in view. 
On the present occasion there must have been some ceremony —s_ —~ 
performed during which the terms of the curse would be recited. 
_ The belief in these times was that an uttered curse executed itself 
_by its own inherent energy (see art. ‘Magic’ (by the present — 


writer), Excyc. Brit., col. 289°, and also art. ‘ Blessings and Curses,’ Se 
col, 5q1 fi). 

God’s law: see on Vili. I. 

commandments ... judgements... statutes: see on i. 7. 


_ 30-39. The obligations which the people take upon themselves. 

30. that we would not give our daughters, &c. : there is no 
explicit prohibition of mixed marriages in the P code, so that the 
‘law here cited must be that of Exod. xxxiv. 16 (J) and Deut. 
“vii. 3. 
| the peoples of the land: see on Ezra iii. 3. 

31. The law of the Sabbath here is much likelier to be prior to 
that of xiii. 15-22 than (as Kosters holds) the reverse. The fact 
that this law was broken is no proof that it did not exist. More- 

Over xiii. 15 ff. goes beyond the present undertaking, in that it for- 








248 NEHEMIAH 1 


. 33 shekel for the service of the house of our God ; for t 






shewbread, and for the continual meal Geta; and | 
®. See Exod. xxiii. ro, 11. > See Deut. xv. I, ae 





bids the bringing into Jerusalem on the Sabbath of wares to te 
sold, even if no Jews bought them. Es ‘ 

a holy day : any one of the festivals. + 

that we would forgo the seventh year: the eileen 
words in this verse show that the reference is to Exod. xxiii. 16 f 
(JE) and not at.all to the late law in Lev. xxv, 2- r7,another Bae 
of early date. 

the exaction of every debt: referring to Deut. xv. 1-3, ‘ 
which enacts that every seventh year (beginning at any time) debts 
should be remitted (so Steuernagel, Bertholet), or (as Dillmann 


_ and Driver ? hold) suspended until the year was past. It is im- 


portant to remember that among the Jews loans were made to” 
poor people as acts of charity (see on v. 1-5). el 4 


32f. A tax of one-third of a shekel for the upkeep of the Temple 
services. The words we made ordinances, Ps show that bee is Pd 
a new arrangement, replacing, it is probable, a voluntary and 
fore uncertain payment. There is no prior law on the subject. 
Exod. xxx. 13 (late P) belongs to a much later time, and, mor 
the. half-shekel poll-tax there is merely an ad hoc tami 


' according to Bertholet, and not a law for the future. But eas 


vi last view may be adduced 2 Chron, xxiv. 4f.; Matt. xvii. 
; and Josephus, Wars, vii. 6, 6. 

Up mN Gas that Exod. xxx. 13 imposes a poll-tax of halfa shekel, 
this shows, what is otherwise abundantly proved, the growth of 
priestly influence and privilege. 

Benzinger ! gives figures to show that one-third of the shekel of 
the present verse (Babylonian, Persian) has the same value as one © 
half the shekel of Exod. xxx. 13 (Phoenician, Maccabean), so that 
in that case there is no contradiction. ; 

33. In this verse the separate uses to which the tax thus in 
posed was to be put are enumerated. 

shewbread: lit., ‘ bread set in rows * (see Lev. xxiv, 5 f. ); 
cf. 1 Chron. ix. 32, XXiii, 29). In Exod. xxv. 30(P) it is called ‘bread : 
of the face’ or ‘ presence,’ because exposed before Deity, and * holy 
bread’ in 1 Sam. xxi. 4. The table of shewbread was originally 
an altar, the bread on it being the offering. Sayce, Fried. Delitzsch, 








1 Heb. Archaologie, p. 200f eae | 


ae aes 





ni ons, for the set feasts, and for the holy things, and for TD 
the sin offerings to make atonement for Israel, and . 
a all the work of the house of our God. ind we 34 7 


upt and, hesitatingly, Zimmern! say that such table-like altars ~~ 

“with unleavened cakes on them existed in Babylonian temples. ~ 
-. continual (=‘ daily’) burnt offering: see on Ezra iii. 3, 
“IX. 4. The custom implied here—that of presenting a meat and 

meal offering in the morning and evening respectively—is that 

which prevailed immediately before the exile (see p. 9). 3e 
a of the Sabbaths ...new moons... set feasts: the con- a; 

tinual, i. e. daily, sacrifices were to be made on feast days as if = 
“they were ordinary days, but additions had to be made in each 
_ case according to a scale given in detail in Num. xxviii f. eo, 
‘The set feasts are given in detail in Num, xxviii, 16-xxix. 38, - 
hough the laws of Num. xxviii f. may represent later developments ~ 
3 _of the kindred laws of Nehemiah’s time, | We have no means of 

deciding this or the contrary. 

Ec the holy things: a general term for sacrifices. In 2 Chron. 
xxix. 33 the word is used specifically of ‘thank offerings,’ and in” 
-2Chron. xxxv. 13 of sacrifices offered on the days following the 
"Passover. Bertholet says the word stands here for the compensa- 5 
_ tion (wrongly called peace) offerings, but the above passages cited = 
by him do not prove that, nor does anything else. eae 
sin offerings: so called because intended to secure forgive- 

“hess for sin committed. The earliest reference to these is in 
Ezek. xlv. 17, It formed in later times a part of the regular 
burnt offering, being presented at New Moon and other festivals : 
see Num. xxviii. 15 ff., xxix; cf. Lev. xvi. aI. : 

to make atonement means lit, to ‘ cover,’ i. e, God’s eyes, so 

that He may not see and therefore punish sin; so the ‘Arabic . 
; ‘cognate verb. 1 Sam. xii. 3 makes this explanation very plausible, 

the word there rendered ‘ransom’ being the noun cognate with E 

the verb ‘to cover (my eyes).’. Some derive the word from 

a verb = ‘to obliterate,’ ‘wipe out’ (cf. the Assyrian): see Lev. 7 

iv. 10 and Bertholet’s long note on Lev. i. 4. 

a and for all the work: referring back to the beginning of ~~ 
the verse, not to the immediately preceding words. at 
_ In all the work we have a summing up of what has been 
mentioned in this verse. 

the work: see lii. 22; Ezra vi. 9, vii. 20-22. 


























z KATO, p. 600 (including note 3). 








by year, to burn upon the altar of the Lorp our God, ; r | 
35 it is written in the law: and to bring the firstfruits ¢ of. 











34. we cast lots: see xi. 1; 1 Chron. xxv. 13f. The lot 
cast not merely to prevent dispute, but also because Deity 
Supposed thus to express His will. 

- the priests, the Levites: the regular Deuteronomic pli 1 
(see Deut. xviii. 1). Perhaps, however, we should here (with 
the ancient versions) read ‘the priests and the Levites.’ we 
_ for the wood offering: better, ‘for the bringing of ‘the 
wood’: see xiii. 31. 

at times appointed: see xiii. 3r and Ezra x. 14. Accordin: Wl 
to Rabbinical tradition wood was brought nine times a year; but 
Josephus, Wars, ii. 17, 6, seems to show that this was done | 
- the 14th of Ab (July-August), which came hence to be calle 
“the feast of the wood offering’ or of ‘the bringing of wood” 
na as it is written: no law of the kind can be traced in the 
ey Pentateuch or anywhere else in the O.T. Perhaps the es 
-- is to some law then existing, and classed with other la . 
‘supposed Mosaic origin. But we have here clear proof tl Ei 
Ezra’s law was not our Pentateuch. Rawlinson refers to io 
vi. t2, which has, however, to do with the burning not the bringing 
of wood for the altar. we 

35. firstfruits (of our ground) : see Exod. xxiii. ‘19, XXxiv. 3 

(JE); cf. Deut. xviii. 4, xxvi. 2ff. In ver. 37 a different Hebrew | 

word (ra’shét) is so translated; here the Heb. word is bik- 
kurim. Do the two words connote two different things ? 
Gesenius, Wellhausen*, Bertholet, &c., answer in the affirmative, 
holding that bikkurim = ‘ first-ripe fruit’ as the E.VV. render ‘itin- 

_ Nahum iii. r2 and Num. xviii. 13; the etymology supports this: 
(the same root lies in the Hebrew word for ‘firstborn,’ bekor). 
The other Hebrew word (7a’shet) means elsewhere often ‘the 
best,’ ‘choicest’ (see Prov. iii. 9; Deut. Xxxili. 21) and ait.. 
may denote this in ver. 37 and kindred passages. 

Many, however, hold that whatever difference the two words ; 

had, in actual usage they are Synonymous: so 


originally Bt ee ee: ee 
1 Taanit, iv. 5, 8. See Schiirer, ii. 1. 252 (Germ. ii. 260) a. 
2 Proleg.©) 165. ‘eld +z 






























< 1 a 
~ t 


pe >. 251 





_of trees, year by year, unto the house of the Lorp: also 36 
the firstborn of our sons, and of our cattle, as it is 
written in the law, and the firstlings of our herds and of- 

our flocks, to bring to the house of our God, unto the 

"priests that minister in the house of our God: and that 37 


we should bring the firstfruits of our *dough, and our 


: ® Or, coarse nieal 





Dillmann!, G. B. Gray ®, and of older commentators, Clericus and 
_ Hupfeld. 

_ In later times the word b:kkurim came to be applied to the first- 
fruits of the ‘seven kinds’ of trees enumerated in Deut. viii. 8, 
the word 7a’shéét being used in reference to other products of the 

ground °. 

In each case only a portion of the firstfruits was offered to 
Yahweh, as is made clear in Deut. xxvi. 2 ff. by the use of the 
partitive sn. 

The practice of offering to Deity the first products of the soil, 
common among many ancient peoples‘, could not have arisen_ 
among the Hebrews until they had exchanged a pastoral for an 
agricultural life. Probably they took over the practice from the 

Canaanites. 

36. the firstborn of our sons: see Exod. xxii. 29, on;which 
the present prescription seems to rest. Taking these two passages 
by themselves one might infer that firstborn boys, as firstborn male 

/ animals, had to be sacrificed, and perhaps the words had at the 
first this meaning, for there are several traces of the practice of 

’ human sacrifice in the O.T.; cf. the case of Isaac (Gen. xxii. 1 ff.) 
and that of Jephthah’s daughter (Judgesxi. 34 ff.). But we are here 
no doubt to assume the operation of the law of redemption recorded 
in Exod. xiii. 13, xxxiv. 20 (J); cf. Num. xviii. 16 (P). 

cattle: explained more fully below. 

as itis written : the reference is to what follows; see below. 

firstlings of our herds... fiocks: no passages seem fo suit 
for bases except Num, xviii. 15-18, which in its present setting at 
least is later than our passage. According to this unclean animals 

were to be redeemed (ver. 15), clean ones to be sacrificed (ver. 17). 

37, firstfruits: Heb. ra’ shéét; see on ver. 35. 

dough: so the LXX; but the exact sense of the Hebrew 
“word, found whiten: here and Num. xv. 21 (see Gray on), is very 


v 


1 On Exod: xxiii. 19. 2 On Num. xviii. 13. 
3 Schiirer “), ii. 249 (Eng. Il. i. 137 f.). 
* Robertson ‘Smith (Rel. Sem.™, 241). 





heave offerings, and the fruit of all manner ) 
* Or, the vintage 





uncertain. Apparently some kind ‘of cereal food is "Yaa 
which part of the first made had to be presented to Yah : 
.Perhaps oaten or wheaten porridge is meant. yi 
heave offerings: a very inaccurate and misleading transla- é 
tion, for the offerings meant were not ‘heaved,’ The word meade’ 
simply ‘a gift’ or ‘contribution,’ and the cognate verb = ‘to 
Driver on Deut. xii. 6, in DB. iii. 588 and on Mal. iii. 8 (Coa 
Bible) suggests «contributions, ’ lit. “ what is lifted from a larger 
quantity,’ and so given. 3 
The word is used in P of contributions (money, spoils, &c.) for 
sacred purposes (see Exod. xxv. 2f, xxx. 13-15; Num. XxxXi 
29, 41). In Ezra it stands for the donations made to the Tem ple, 2 
and in Ezek. (xlv. 1,6, &c.) it is used of the land reserved For 
priests and Levites; ‘see further Lev. vii. 32-34, What specifically 
the word connotes here and in xii. 44 is not quite clear, but the — 
present writer is inclined to think that it is a general term for 
; What follows ; see on ver. 39. 
37°-38. Tithes, The sacred tithe is not known in the older i 
codes, Deut. xiv. 22-27 and xxvi. 15 being the earliest biblical — 
law enacting it, Num. xxv. 32 (P) is later, and Lev, xxvii. 
later still. The present law differs from those in the above Deut. 
passages, see Ryle, Com., p. 279. ; 
Tithing as a principle of taxation prevailed to a Jae extent 
among ancient nations, Egyptians, Babylonians, &c.1 
The arrangement in the present instance was as follows: The — 
' tithe of Jand produce (not here of the cattle as in Lev. xxvii. 32) _ 
was brought to the Levites, as yet living in country places, who — 
received it in the presence of a priest who was to prevent. 
any purloining. ~The Levites brought a tithe of this tithe (see 
Num. xviii. 25-28) to Jerusalem for the maintenance of the priests. 
There is nothing about the payment of tithes in the older codes, 1 
but it, is prescribed in the D and P codes, only that the law in © 
each case differs, the later law favouring the priests in harmony 
with the growing power of the latter. In D (see Deut. xii. 17f, — 
xiv. 22-29, xxvi. 12) the tithe is levied on vegetable produce 
alone, and moreover in two years out of three it was devoted to ~ 
the sacred festivals in which the offerer and his family shared at 
the central sanctuary (Deut. xiv. 22-29). In the third year it was 
to be stored up in the offerer’s own city for the purpose of being 
distributed among the poor (Deut. xiv. 28f., xxvi. 12). In both 
these cases:the priests and others had part of the tithe thus offered. 








3 SeeC. F. Kent, Ierank shou and Legal Proceedings, p. 231 (note). 


<li 3 





u nto the Levites ; for aa the Levites, take the tithes in 

all the cities of our tillage. And the priest the son of 38 — 

_ Aaron shall be with the Levites, when the Levites take 
tithes : : and the Levites shall bring up the tithe of 
“the tithes unto the house of our God, to the chambers,- 

Gato the treasure house. For the children-of Israel and 39 

the children of Levi shall bring the heave offering of the = 
corn, of *the wine, and of the oil, unto the chambers, 
where are the vessels of the sanctuary, and the priests 

z “that minister, and the porters, and the singers: and we 
wil not forsake the house of our God. k ns 

® Or, the vintage. 20 














Ba the Priestly Code (see Lev. xxvii. 30-33; Num. xviii. 21-32) “= 
" tithed cattle as well as vegetable produce (see Lev. xxvi. 32 f.), and 


_ this tithe went entirely to the Levites, who had to give one-tenth of” “2 
_ what they received to the priests. In the present instance it will 
be seen that the D law is followed as regards what is tithed— 
vegetable produce alone; but in other respects the law in P is 
"followed. Probably here and in xiii. 5 we are to recognize an” 


intervening stage of custom between D and P. ee 
_ 38. to the chambers, into the treasure house: the latter ~*~ 
(better rendered ‘the place of the treasure’) is simply anexplana- 
tion of the former, to the chambers (or ‘cells,’ see on Ezra 
4 Vili. 29) used to receive the tithe, &c., and also as dwellings for ~ : 
- the priests. et 
39. heave offering : better ‘ contribution,’ see on ver. 37. Here 
_ the term is general for firstfruits and tithes, asin Num. xviii. 24-28. 
vessels: those used for holding the gifts in kind (tithe, &c.), 
_ not those spoken of in Ezra i. 7-11. 
~ we will not forsake the house of our God: i.e. we will not 
“neglect to pay our dues for the maintenance of the Temple officials” 
_and its services. o 2a 








+o Rl Tee 


: Part II (or Nenemian Proper). 

ith ch. xi the narrative interrupted by the Ezra section 
vii. 73°-x is resumed. 

Xi. 1 joins on immediately to vii. 4; though there is not sufficient 

_ reason to separate from the latter vii. 5-73°. 

# Tbe Bepblem in vii. 4 is—how to fill the now well- defended = 





p= 





~~ 


athe ofher cities. And the people blessed all the rae 


254. ~~» NEHEMIAH Al. 
11 [N] And the princes of the people avek 
the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of 


to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts it 






that willingly offered themselves to dwell in Jerusalem. 


capital? The walls are completed, there is room for a large 


' population, but how can it be secured ? oil 
xi. 1 f. is what remains of a fuller text. The very conjunction 
‘and’ implies probably (though as good Hebraists know not neces- 
sarily, since the ‘aw consecutive’ tense came often to be a 
tense simple!) connexion with a lost clause which perhaps told of 
a second assembly held after that of vii. 5. In this assembly 
it was not improbably decided that princes, now living ae 
wholly in the country for purposes of agriculture, should t 
themselves to the capital, and that a tenth of the able men in tt 
country should be chosen by lot to settle in Jerusalem along — 
with the princes. Perhaps the decision to replenish the general 
population in the way indicated was reached after the princes had 
settled in Jerusalem. wit 
1. princes: see on Ezra ix. r. 33 
the rest, &c.: render, ‘ but the rest,’ &c., omitting also. 
cast lots: see on x. 34. 
one of ten, &c.: Berth. and Rawl. give many incteaiaee 
of similar methods being used to repopulate ancient cities 
(Rome, &c.). 
the holy city: see ver: 18; Isa. xlviii. 2; Joel iii. 17; 
Dan. ix. 16, 24; cf. the modern name of Jerusalem, E/-Ouds= — 
the holy one. Jerusalem is never so called in Chronicles, ot ¥ ; 
gesting that the passage is free from his influence. : 
2. the men that willingly offered, &e. > ine. those who: y, 
their own accord and for the ‘good of the cause’ volunteered — 
to make their homes in the capital. Keil, Siegfried, and others 
hold that by these words the persons elected by lot are meant, 
but it can hardly be said that they ‘ willingly offered’ 
In xi. 3-xii. 26 we have lists which have sorely taxed the — 
ingenuity of learned commentators. Many recent scholars hold 
that these lists are due to the prolific imagination of the Chronicler: 
“so Wellhausen, Meyer, and Bertholet. It is strange,’ however, 
if that be so, that this Chronicler did not make a better show of 
consistency, for the lists in verses 3-19 and 1 Chron, ix, 2-17 go 
back, no doubt, to one original, though differing a good deal in ~ 
details and also in their context. Of course these differences 
are due in part, and it may be wholly, to the copyists. 
2 See on Ezra i. 1. 


4 









fo the Chronicler. But it seems to the present writer that the 
‘exile is a sufficient explanation of the large use made of genea- 
logical registers after the return in 536 B.c. When the Southern 
Kingdom came to an end, and the flower of the-nation was trans- 
ported to Babylon, the national records, religious and political, 
would be removed to Babylon either by the Persian government 
or by the exiles themselves; see Introd. to Ezra ii. On their 
return such tables would be "found of the greatest utility in the 
reconstitution and reorganization of the new community, and one 
need not be surprised that they are often referred to (Ezra ii; 
Neh, vii, x) and that others based on them were made. 
3 To what period do the lists in xi. 3-36 belong ? Three opinions 
have been defended. 
_ 1. The time before the exile. Smend! maintains that the 
country parts of Judah were occupied, as xi. 25 ff. implies, between 


Chronicles, therefore the lists in Ezra and Nehemiah are also due 


the beginning of the exile (606) and the Maccabean age. A similar ~ 


contention is made by Meyer, though in his case it is to argue 
from it to a late date for the list. In reply it is to be said that 
But knowledge of the period between Nehemiah and the Maccabees 
far too slight to draw any dogmatic conclusions from it except 
within narrow limits. Moreover, there might well be a goodly 
number of Jewish families scattered about Judah for agricultural 
and pastoral purposes, all of them protected by the Persian 
eeerimcnt, and some of them perhaps descendants of Jews 
never removed to Babylon. 
- 2. The time of Nehemiah: so the majority of commentators, 
including Keil, Ber.-Ryss., and Ryle. 

No conclusive reasons have been given for rejecting this view, 
which is implied in the present arrangement of the Hebrew and 
English Bible,-though the latter has in itself but little value. If 
We assume that these lists were put into the form implied in the 
greatly corrupted M.T. by or for Nehemiah, they have for basis 
the list (largely pre-exilic) in Ezra ii. 
wns The time of the ‘Chronicler. Wellhausen, Meyer, Ber- 

olet, &c., hold that these lists are evidence of the state of things 
in the Chronicler’ s own time. They assume, of course, that this 
chapter is the Chronicler’s own work, and, in fact, is based on 
t Chron, ix, and not the converse. 


_ 3-24 (except ver. 20). Heads of Jewish and Benjamunite families 
jow resident in Jerusalem. In vii (=Ezra ii) they represent clans 
or families. 

In rt Chron. ix. 3 mention is made in a general way of families 
belonging to Ephraim and Manasseh, though no names are <a 
+. Sa 










' Lehrbuch’ 340 n. 


> 











in Jerusalem: but in the cities of Judah dwelt ev 
~ in his possession in their cities, 70 wf, Israel, the pi 
‘and the Levites, and the Nethinim, and the children a 
4Solomon’s servants. And in Jerusalem dwelt 
of the children of Judah, and of the children of Ben 
Of the children of Judah: Athaiah the son of Uzziah, 
the son of Zechariah, the son of Amariah, the son 
Shephatiah, the son of Mahalalel, of the children 


5 of Perez; and Maaseiah the son of Baruch, the son o 


Col-hozeh, the son of Hazaiah, the son of Adaiah, the 
son of Joiarib, the son of Zechariah, the son of he 


6lonite. All the sons of Perez that dwelt in Jeru 


were four hundred threescore and eight valiant men. 
® See 1 Chron. ix. 2, &c. - 








3-9. Heads of Ialp families. oh 
3-6. Judahites. 4 
3. chiefs: i.e. heads of houses (families), In 1 Chron. i ix. a 
the word is by mistake ‘ first.’ These had formerly lived on their 
country estate. Rea 
province: see on Ezra i, and cf. Neh. i. g f. ~¥ 
but in the cities of Judah, &c. : i. e. the bulk of those pelotied 
ing to the Jewish community, lay and official, had their home in 
the provincial centres (cities, towns, and villages): see on Ezra x. 14. 
Israel : i. e. laymen as distinguished from the Temple ch 
priests, &c. See on Ezra x. 25. 


i Nethinim : see on Ezra ii. 43 ff. 
children of Solomon’s servants: see on Ezra ii. 58. The 


are absent from the list in r Chron. ix. 
4. Athaiah: in 1 Chron. ix ‘Uthai,’ really one name. a 
Hebrew the resemblance in spelling is closer than in English. — 
Perez: see Gen, xxviii. 29. is 
5. Col-hozeh: see iii. 15. Bes 
“the son of the Shilonite: read, ‘the Shelanite,’ from 
‘Shelah’ (see Num. xxvi. 20). The word rendered ‘son’ (ben) 
means simply one of the class ‘Shelanites.’ It is Masseiah 
(x Chron. ix, Asaiah) that is so called. ‘ Jeuel,’ ‘of the sons of 
Zerah’ (Judah's third son), is added in 1 Chron. ix. 6. ¥ 
6. four hundred threescore and eight: in I Chron. ‘si 
hundred and ninety.’ re 














/ NEHEMIATL 1, yon. Cs . 257° 


“a these are the sons of Benjamin: Sallu the son of 7 
Meshullam, the son of Joed, the son of Pedaiah, 

e son of Kolaiah, the son of Maaseiah, the son 
‘of Ithiel, the son of Jeshaiah. And after him Gabbai, 8 
Sallai, nine hundred twenty and eight. And Joel the9 
‘sonof Zichri was their overseer: and Judah the son 
of Hassenuah was second over the city. Of the priests: 10 
Jedaiah the son of Joiarib, Jachin, Seraiah the son of rx 
‘Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the 
‘son of Meraioth, theson of Ahitub, the ruler of the house 

of God, and their brethren that did the work of the house, 12 


i 





valiant men: men able to engage in war. n 
_ 4-9. Benjamites. In later times the tribe of Benjamin is 
lost in that of Judah: see on Ezrai. 5. The names in 1 Chron. 
differ considerably from those found here. 

8. Read, ‘And hisclansmen (so Luc., cf. verses 12, 13, 14) were 
mighty warriors, nine hundred and twenty-eight.’ The changes 
in the Hebrew to produce the above are not great, Gabbai, 
Sallai being evidently a corruption of ‘ might warriors’ (Gibboré 
Khai). 

9. overseer: LXX episcopos, whence our ‘bishop.’ The 
Hebrew=‘one appointed over’: so verses 14, 22; Esther ii. 3 
(E.VV. ‘ officers ’). 

10-24 (except 20). Temple Officials. 

10-14. Priests. 

-. 10. For son of Joiarib read ‘ Joiarib’; so 1 Chron. ix. 10; ef. 
‘t Chron. xxiv. 7. 
41. Seraiah: 1 Chron. ix. 11 ‘Azariah.’ The designation 
‘ruler of the house of God’ is attached to the latter name in 
2 Chron. xxxi. 13; cf. 2 Kings xxv. 18. Probably an official of 
priestly standing charged with the general oversight of the 
Temple is intended. 

ruler of the house of God: hardly the high-priest, as there 
Were at the same time several officials so designated : see 2 Chron. 
xxxy. 8. If the high-priest is meant this ‘Seraiah’ might, as 
Bertheau suggests, be the ancestor of Ezra mentioned in Ezra 
Vii. 1. 

12. and their brethren : better, * clansmen ’, 

_ that did, &c.: the words ‘that did,’ &c., describe the work 
eo the priests mentioned in ver. 11 and their brother clansmen. 


~~ $2 















258 


eight panared twenty saa two" "ana h the 
Jeroham, the son of Pelaliah, the son of Ama 
of Zechariah, the son of Pashhur, the son of Malck 
13 and his brethren, chiefs of fathers’ ouses, two hundi 
' forty and two; and Amashsai the son of Azarel, the’son 
14 Ahzai, the son of Meshillemoth, the son of Immer, and 
their brethren, mighty men of yalour, an hundred 
and eight: and their overseer was Zabdiel, * the son of. 
35 Haggedolim. And of the Levites: Shemaiah the son 
of Hasshub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, 
16 the sonof Bunni; and Shabbethai and Jozabad, of the 
chiefs of the Levites, who had the oversight of the out- 
17 ward business of the house of God; and Mattaniah the 
son of Mica, the son of Zabdi, the son of Asaph, who” 
was the chief to begin the thankies: in prayer, and 


* Or, one of the great men Ss ; 
—-. to. Le oe 8) ee eee : = 
13. Amashsai: 1 Chron, ix. 12 ‘ Maasai.’ ean} 


; 
14. their (brethren) : read ‘ his’ (with Luc. and LXX). ‘Clans-— 
men’ is better than ‘ brethren.’ are, 
15-18. Leuttes. % 
16. Shabbethai and Jozabad, of the chiefs of the Levites: 
the Levites had evidently several overseers : see ver. 22, 
the outward business of the house: cf. on ver. 22 and” “see. 
1 Chron. xxvi. 29. Here the phrase denotes duties other than 
those connected with the worship and ritual of the Temple build- " 
ing proper, such as carving for the fabric, procuring the necessary — : 
supplies of wood, animals, &c., for food, sacrifice, &c., accepting 
gifts to the Temple and safeguarding them (Ezra viii. 33): ea 
17. Zabdi: read (with Luc., LXX) ‘Zikri.’ ~~ 
_ the chief to begin: render (changing one consonant into 
another almost exactly like it), ‘the leader of the Psalm-singing’: 
so Luc., LXX, Vulg. Be 
the thanksgiving in prayer: render, ‘offered thanks’ 
(‘praised,’ see on Ezra iii, rr and x. r) ‘during prayer? ~~ 
This inclusion of musicians among the Leyites, usual in 
Chronicles, is not met with in the original sources of Ezra-— 
Nehemiah (see p. 61). We have the same inclusion of singers 
among the Levites in ver. 22, xii. 8, 27, and in Ezra iii. 7. These 
parts are perhaps from the hand of the Chronicler, or they may | ‘ 
have been worked over by him. “3 rea 

















the Levites, were in all the cities of Judah, every onein nd 
heritance. But the Nethinim dwelt in Ophel: andar — 
a and Gishpa were over the Nethinim. The overseer 2; 











_ Bakbukiah: in 1 Chron. ix. 15 ‘ Bakbakkar.’ 

_ the second: i.e. to Mathaniah., 

> brethren: better, ‘ clansmen.’ 

_ gJeduthun: named in the titles of Pss. xxxix, lxii, and 

cxvil (see 1 Chron, xvi. 41). Inxz Chron. vi. 33-47, xv. 17, 19, 

man, Asaph, and Ethan are mentioned as the leading singers; 
ft in 1 Chron. xvi. 41, xxv. 1 ff. Jeduthun takes the place of, 

‘Etha an owing, it would appear, to a different tradition. 

18. the holy city: see on xi. I, 

19. the porters. In the parallel passage (1 Chron. ix. 17 ff.) ’ 

a long addition is made to the present verse, probably an inter- 

polation. 

the porters: see on Ezra ii. 49 ff. 

. This verse should immediately precede ver. 25, from which, 

bably by a copyist, it has been separated: -see below. 


—24. Notes concerning certain officials appointed by the king. 
. Nethinim: see on Ezra ii. 43 ff. 
'  Ophel: see on iii. 27. 
22. overseer : see on ver. 16. 
_ of the sons of Asaph: belonging to the guild of Asaphites. 
cannot be proved that such a man as Asaph existed: see 
alms, vol. ii, p. 37 (Century Bible). * 
over the business of the house of God: i.e. over the ni, 
iturgical services of the Temple. Uzzi’s duties were therefore of — 
Bice character than those of Shabbethai and Jozabad (ver. 16, 









































king saw to the regular SEDPOr of the singers, See. aan 











_ 24 provision for the singers, as every day eae 
'Pethahiah the son of Meshezabel, of the chil 
Zerah the son of Judah, was at the king’s hand 

_ 25 Matters concerning the people. And for the villages, 

=~ with their fields, some of the children of Judah Be 


* Or, a sure ordinance concerning 





eee 

the king: evidently Artaxerxes I: see ver. 24 and the above 
passages. This king took a special interest in the Temple service. 
a Settled provision: lit. ‘something firm’ (see on x. Es: . 

24. Pethahiah was evidently an official who acted between 
king and the Jéws, especially in matters affecting the psalmody a 
the house. Zerah : see on ver. 5. ‘he 

at the king’s hand: i.e. at the king’s disposal to represent 
the king in the particular matters just spoken of. It does not mean, 
that he was governor at Jerusalem, for we assume that Nehemiah 
held that position at the time under review. 
eae This man’s jurisdiction is often held (as by Siegfried) to extend 
>to general Jewish affairs in Jerusalem, his superior residing at’ 
-- Samaria (Ezra iv. 8, 17). But it is exceedingly probable that 
Judah and Samaria were administered by separate governors : 
see on Ezra viii. 36. 1 

20, 25-36. Country parts of Judah outside Jerusalem inhabited by 
Jews. See p. 254 (notes on verses 1 f. and on ver. 3). 

We have here the same general divisions as in ver. ates 
Judahites and Benjamites, laymen and Temple officials, only we 
seem to have but a torso of what was originally written. In be: 

>. verses we have a list of the outlying places where the clans reside 
" in verses 3 f. of the heads of clans that. settled in Jerusalem. — x! fe 
z 20. This verse forms a general introduction to verses oP 
and belongs here. 
the residue of: the same Hebrew word translated ‘the rest 
of’ in ver. 1. Here it means what remains when those settled in 
Jerusalem are taken from the Jewish community. : 
Israel: laymen ; see on ver. I. P 
25-30. The Judahites. : = 
25. And for the villages, &c. : render, ‘And as regards the 
estates with their fields,’ &c. Ver. 20 tells us that those of the 
community that lived outside of Jerusalem dwelt on their several 
land properties (‘ possessions’: E.VV. ‘inkeritance’). In 
ver. 25 the writer passes on to remark that as regards these 
estates and the adjoining lands ‘some Judahites dwelt a ae. 
See Lev. xxv. 31 (‘the houses of the wall-less villages shall be 
counted as belonging to the country fields,” et as 






. vse 


Ye 


FE 
4 






See /NEHEMIAIT Vigae i. Coe hee 





‘in Riviatharba and the * towns thereof, and in Dibon and 
t the * towns thereof, and in Jekabzeel and the villages 


thereof ; and in Jeshua, and in Moladah, and Beth-pelet ; 26 . 
/ and in Hazar-shual, and in Beer-sheba and the * towns 27 
thereof; and in Ziklag, and in Meconah and in the 8 


- *towns thereof ; and in En-rimmon, and in Zorah, and in 29 
‘Jarmuth ; Zanoah, Adullam, and their villages, Lachish 30 
and the fields thereof, Azekah and the * towns thereof. 
‘So they encamped from Beer-sheba unto the valley of 


* Heb. daughters. 


villages: lit. ‘enclosures’: then abode. Here the word 
denotes in general the various settlements in Judah. 
Kiriath-arba: according to Judges i. 10 the older name of 





Hebron : see Gen. xxiii. 2 (P); Joshua xiv.15. But if this is the 


_ older name, why is it used here ? 


i. 


and the towns thereof : lit. ‘and its daughters, the regular 


‘phrase for ‘and its dependent places’ (cities, towns, or villages). 
P Pp Pp ) g' 


Dibon ... Jekabzeel: usually identified with Dimonah and 
Kabzeel (Joshua xv. 21 f.). 
26. Jeshua: nowhere else mentioned in the O. T. 
Moladah: see Joshua xv. 26. Not yet identified. 
Beth-pelet: see Num. x. 26; Joshua xv. 27. Hitherto not 
identified. 
Hazar-shual... Beersheba: see Joshua xv. 28, &c, The 
latter is now called Bir es-Seba'a. 
28. Ziklag: see Joshua xv. 31; 1 Sam. xxx. i. 
Meconah: named nowhere else in the O.T. Probably = 
the modern Mekenna, twelve miles north-west of Beit Jibrin. 
29. En-rimmon: see Joshuaxv.32, xix. 7; 1 Chron.iv. 32, where 


_ in the LXX (best codd.) the same reading is implied. The M.T. of 


the passages cited assumes two places, ‘ Ain’ (‘En’)and ‘ Rimmon.? 
Zorah: see Joshua xv. 33. Jarmuth: see Joshua xv. 35. 
30. Zanoah : see Joshua xv. 34=the modern Zaniz’a, two and 
a half miles south of Beth Shemesh. 
Adullam ...Azekah: see Joshua xv. 35. 
Lachish (see Joshua xv. 39, &c., &c.) = the modern Tell-el- 


_ Hesy (or Umm Lakis?*), An important Amorite city. 


from Beer-sheba (in the extreme south of the land) to the 


| valley of Hinnom (in the extreme north of Judah). 





* So Robinson. But the modern Umm Lakish more probably 
‘occupies the site of a city founded by a colony from Lakish 
(= Lachish). Professor Sayce, however, tells me that Umm Lakish 
_ (which the natives now call Lafish) is a Roman village. 







Geba onward, at Michmash and Aija, and at Be! 
32, 33 the * towns thereof; at Anathoth, Nob, Ananiah ; 
34, 35 Ramah, Gittaim; Hadid, Zeboim, Neballat ; Lod, 

36 Ono, the valley of craftsmen. And of the Levi 
certain courses in Judah were joined to Benjamin. 
* Heb. daughters. ” Or, Gehahavashim See x Chron. iv. 14. & 


Ni ae The Femsaiastcs a Ln 
31-35. The Benjamites. ih 
31. from Geba onward: read, ‘at Geba,’ changing one con- 

sonant. at > 

, Geba: see op Ezra ii. 26, “ke 
Michmash*: see on Ezra ti. 27. Bt 
For Aija (= Ai) and Bethel-see on Ezra ii. 28. - ae 

32. Anathoth: see on Ezra ii. 23. ie am 


Nob: a priest’s city quite close to Jerusalem, but as yet 
unidentified : see 1 Sam. xxi. 1, xxii. 9, IT, 19, &c. 

Ananiah: nowhere else referred to in the O.T. Com-— 
monly identified with Beit Hannina, a village two miles to the 
north of Jerusalem. 

33. Hazor: probably=the modern Ahurbet Hassir, a little” 
north of Jerusalem, quite close to the last-named place 

Ramah: see on Ezra ii, 26. 

Gittaim: mentioned only here. Itsexact position isunknown, 

34. Hadid: see on Ezra ii. 33. 

Zeboim : not identified and nowhere else named; but cf 
I Sam. xiii. 18 (‘ the valley of Zeboim’). 

Neballat —the modern Beit Nebala, about four miles north= | 
east of Lydda. Nowhere else mentioned. oy 

35. Lod... Quo: seeon Ezra ii. 33. ; 
; the wenn’ of craftsmen: on the road between Jerusalem — 
. and Jaffa: see 1 Chron. iv. 14, where the A.V. and R.V. treat the ~ 
words asa proper name, Ge-harashtm. The valley had its name © 
probably from the large number of craftsmen who dwelt in it. 
36. Render (with Luc.), ‘And some of the Levites’ (who did 
Not live at Jerusalem) ) ‘were in Judah and (some) in Benjamin’: 
i.e. the non-Jerusalem Levites were distributed in Judah and 
Benjamin. The meaning of the M.T. is, ‘some Levites who in™ 
former times had been attached to Judah, now had their homes in 
Benjamin.’ 


tae 


XII. 1-26, Various Lists or Priests AND LevITES. 
We have in this section a collection of separate lists which — 
appear to have been kept in the Temple archives, and the placing | 
of which here was suggested by the list in xi, 3 Torrey, #5 





wey e re. sea P - ae 


"NEHEMIAH Late ghher ere Sh See 





oF Te] Now these are the priests and the Levites that 12 if 
went up with Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua: 
Seraiah, Jeremiah, Ezra; Amariah, Malluch, Hattush ; 2 
"Shecaniah, Rehum, Meremoth; Iddo, Ginnethoi, Abijah; 3, 4 


_ very sure that every word of ch. xii is by the Chronicler', but if 
so, it is quite inexplicable that he should set side by side lists 
_ which are obviously incomplete and even inconsistent. We have 
here lists which in an older form are old and original, but they 
have been edited and connecting passages inserted, probably by ~ 
different hands and at different times. In verses 11 and 22 
Jaddua, who flourished about 330 8.c., is mentioned, and in 
-ver. 26 the time of Ezra and Nehemiah is looked back to as 
belonging to the distant past. These lists present many difficulties, 
_ chronological and otherwise. If Hashabiah and Sherebiah (ver. 24) 
were contemporaries of Joiakim, son of Jeshua, and also of Ezra 
- (Ezra viii. 18 f.,24), then Ezra and Joiakim must have lived about 
_ the same time, which is exceedingly unlikely, for Jeshua’s son 
could hardly have been high-priest in 458 B. c. 
__ Inverses 1-7 we have virtually the same names assigned to the 
“time of Jeshua which verses 12-21 connect with Jeshua’s son 
_ Joiakim, and which in x. 1 ff. are apparently referred to the time 
of Ezra. This, however, should not occasion any insuperable 
‘difficulty, for in each case the names of houses remain essentially 
unchanged, though the unnamed individuals who represented 
_ them would necessarily vary. 
In verses 8f., 24f. the singers seem (though not by name) to 
be included among the Levites, as are the porters in ver. 25— 
_ a Sign of late date (see p. 61 and on xi. 17). 
1-9. Priestly and Levitical houses at the time of the return under 
_ Zerubbabel and Jeshua. The lists in these verses differ consider- 
_ ably from the corresponding listsin Ezra ii (= Neh. vii) ; perhaps 
~ because the reference is here to corresponding houses as they 
existed in Nehemiah’s day. 
1-7. Priestly houses: see x. 3-9, Ezra ii. 2. 
2. Malluch: in ver. 14 ‘ Malluchi.’ 
Hattush : not in ver. 12 ff. ; 
3. Shecaniah: in ver. 14 ‘Shebaniah’ through confusion of 
_ two similarly written letters. The first form occurs in 1 Chron. 
_ Xxiv. 11 and in the Greek versions (LXX and Luc.) of ver. 14. But 
_ in x. 4 we have ‘ Shebaniah.’ 
__.. -BRehum: in ver. 15 ‘Harim,’ which is more correct (see x. 6 
and Ezra ii. 39). The consonants are identical in both CaS€Siparaet 
_ though differently arranged. 
_ _ #. Ginnethoi: in ver. 16 ‘ Ginnethon,’ as in x. 3. 
= 1 Composition, &c. p. 43. 








4 
lo 







7 Jedaiah ; Sallu, Amok, Hilkiah, te 
the chiefs of the priests and of their brethren in 

8 days of Jeshua. Moreover the Levites: Jeshua, Bini 
‘Kadmiel, Sherebiah, Judah, avd Mattaniah, which wa 

9 over ® the thanksgiving, he and his brethren. Also Bak- 

- _ bukiah and Unno, their brethren, were over against them 
to in wards. And Jeshua begat Joiakim, and Joiakim begat 
at Eliashib, and Eliashib begat Joiada, and Joiada begat 
_~ 1a Jonathan, and Jonathan begat Jaddua. And in the 


* Or, the choirs 





5. Mijamin: in ver. 16 ‘ Miniamin.’ .: 
Maadiah : in ver. 17 ‘Moadiah,’ the correct form being pro- 
bably as Luc. and x. 8 ‘ Maaziah.’ one oe 
7. Sallu: in ver. 20 ‘ Sallai.”’ : : eon 
8f, Levites : see Ezra ii. 40-42. ie 
8. Binnui: sox. 10; in viii. 7 and ix. 4 ‘ Bani? = 
y Kadmiel, Sherebiah : see viii. 7, ix. 4, X. IO, 13. a 
- which was over the thanksgiving, i. e. who had charge of 
the singing, the reference being to Mattaniah only (see xi. 17). 
___ The marginal reading ‘the choirs’ is an error based on the mistaken - 
C; spelling of the Hebrew word. 
. 9. were over against them, i.e. stood opposite to them and 
/ sang in turns with them, i. e. antiphonally (see ver. 24, 2 Ch . 
vii. 7, and cf. Psalms, vol. ii (Century Bible), pp. 26, 236, 245, Pig 
in wards: render, ‘in (their) watches’ = ver. 24,1C 
xxvi. 16), The word denotes the ‘ bands’ or ‘courses’ of Levites 
who in their turns functioned in the Temple. | a. 
tof. The high-priests. e 
10. Jeshua: see on Ezra ii. 2. ta 
Joiakim: it would seem (see verses 12, 26) that under his — 
a superintendence a register of priests and Levites was made. 
Eliashib (see iii. 1 and on Ezra x. 6) and Joiada (see xiii. 28) 
were Nehemiah’s contemporaries. 
11. Jonathan : read ‘ John,’ and see on ver. 22 and on Ezra x. 6. 
Jaddua: no doubt the high-priest mentioned by Josephus 
as going to meet Alexander the Great to appease his wrath as the 
great conqueror was approaching Jerusalem‘, Though the inci- — 
dent related by Josephus is unhistorical, it would appear to ect 
that Jaddua lived about 334 B. c. (see on Ezra x. 6). ’ 








od 1 Antig. xi. 7, 12 and 8, 4f. 











NEHEMIAH 12.'13<23. TR 265 

‘of Joiakim were priests, heads of fathers’ ouses: of 

) Seraiah, Meraiah; of Jeremiah, Hananiah; of Ezra, 13 

~ Meshullam ; of Amariah, Jehohanan ; of * Malluchi, Jona- 14 

than; of Shebaniah, Joseph; of Harim, Adna; of 15 
Meraioth, Helkai; of Iddo, Zechariah ; of Ginnethon, 16 
Meshullam ; of Abijah, Zichri; of Miniamin, of Moadiah, 17 

' Piltai; of Bilgah, Shammua ; of Shemaiah, Jehonathan ; 18 
“and of Joiarib, Mattenai; of Jedaiah, Uzzi; of Sallai, 19, 2 

_ Kallai; of Amok, Eber; of Hilkiah, Hashabiah ; of 2r ~ 

_ Jedaiah, Nethanel. The Levites in the days of Eliashib, 22 

_ Joiada, and Johanan, and Jaddua, were recorded heads 

"of fathers’ Aouses: also the priests, bin the reign of 
Darius the Persian. The sons of Levi, heads of fathers’ 23 


_ houses, were written in the book of the chronicles, even 
Es 2 Another reading is, Melicu. BIOK 30 





B 
_ 
= 








12-21.. Heads of priestly houses in the time of Joiakim (circa 499- 
463 B.c.). For the differences in names see on verses I-7. __ 
17. of Miniamin: the name of the head of this house has 
- fallen out. Read ‘of Miniamin...’ 


22-26. Heads of Levitical houses with sundry short notices. 

22. The text of this verse is obviously corrupt, but the sense is 
evidently, that during the high-priesthood of the four men named 
a register of heads of priestly and Levitical houses was kept. One 
might (making two very trivial textual changes) read, ‘Of the 
Levites in the days of Eliashib...were recorded the heads of 
fathers’ (houses) as also of the priests until the reign of,’ &c. 

in the reign: read, ‘until the reign.’ Guthe and Bertholet 
are wrong when they adduce the Greek and Latin version for this 
change (one letter only), for they have all (including Luc, en) 
evidently followed the LXX, as does the Syr., showing that the 
corruption is old, 
Darius the Persian, i. e. Darius Codomannus (336-331). His 
being called the Persian is often, since Ewald, held to suggesta date 
- for this paragraph at least subsequent to the cessation ofthe Persian — 
_ rule, though Winckler denies this: see p. 19 f., and on Ezrai. 1. 
23. Render, ‘ Of the Levites the heads of,’ &c. 
sons of Levi=Levites. Cf. ‘sons of Israel’=‘ Israelites’ 
(see on Ezra vi. 9). . 
q book of the chronicles: lit. ‘things of the days,’ i. e. ‘daily 
" records,’ the Hebrew name of our books of Chronicles. As the 














t 4 until the days of Johanan thet son re th ib. 

* chiefs of the Levites : Hashabiah, Sherebiah, aud = 

the son of Kadmiel, with their brethren over against the 

to praise and give thanks, according to the commandm: 
_~ 25 of David the man of God, ward against ward. Mattanial 


expression is a common one for official records, one must not 
hastily conclude that the canonical books of Chronicles re 
here cited, though of course nothing in the words forbids t 
interpretation. eas 
until the days of Johanan: this would seem to show _ 
that the records in question were completed during John’ s tenure — 
of the office of high-priest, circa 380. The whole of the Persian — 


$ period would seem to have been embrated in théSe records. 3 
‘ son (i.e. grandson) of Eliashib: see on Ezra v. f, vii. 1-5) 


and viii. 2. 

' 24f. Levitical chiefs. Perhaps the names in these verses 
from the ‘annals’ (chronicles) mentioned in ver. 23, for they ex 
tend to a later date than Joiakim’s (v. 12). 

24. Jeshua the son of Kadmiel: read (making very trivial 
changes which Luc. and LXX favour), ‘ Jeshua, Binnui, and Kad- — 
miel’ (see ver. 8 and x. 10). Jeshua was the son of Jozadak prs 
Jehozadak (see Ezra iii. 2, 8). 

over against them: see on ver. 1. Probably the respondimge” 
partiesin the antiphonal singing were arranged opposite eachother. — 
to praise: the root of the verb occurs in * Hallelujah,’ lit, 
‘praise Yah.’ 
and give thanks: see on Ezra -x.1. Referring to the sub>> 
ject-matter, not the form of the singing. 
according to the commandment of David: see 1 Chron. 
xvi. 4 ff., xxv, &c. The tradition of David as the great organizer 
of Temple music is fully developed in Chronicles (say 300 B. C.), — 
but it must have taken time to grow and become a part of the — 
national belief: see on Ezra iii. ro. ' 
; - the man of God: see ver. 36 and 2 Chron, viii. 14; cf. the 
. title to Ps. xviii. It is impossible to say for certain whether the 
present passage or that in Chronicles is the earlier, but one seems _ 
dependent on the other. 
ward against ward: see on ver. 9. We are not oldie 
Ezra-Nehemiah into how many courses David divided the priests 
and Levites, but according to Chronicles the number was twenty- 
* four in each case (see 1 Chron. xxivf.). We seem in coe big 
: book to have the tradition of David the musician in its earlier oud 
__ simpler form. 
Ah » 25. xi. 17 shows that the three first names belong to the lis 
yo 


3 


3 





res e) 


"NEHEMIAH 12, 26, Te her 


and Bakbukiah, Obadiah, Meshullam, Talmon, Akkub, 

_ were porters keeping the ward at the storehouses of the 26 
_ gates. These were in the days of Joiakim the son of 

_ Jeshua, the son of Jozadak, and in the days of Nehemiah 

_ the governor, and of Ezra the priest the scribe. 


y je ee * S, ‘ r a 
exe 
: 


in ver. 24. The names of the porters (‘ gatekeepers,’ see on 
Ezra ii. 42) begin with Meshullam. 

keeping the ward, &c.: render, ‘keeping watch over the 
‘storerooms at (i.e. near) the gates’ (of the Temple area). 


27-43. THE DEDICATION OF THE WALLS oF JERUSALEM. 


The presence of the ‘I’ in verses 31, 38, 40 shows that we have 
to do, here with the Nehemiah memoirs, though what Nehemiah 
wrote about the dedication has been worked over by later editors 
—the Chroniclers perhaps. The words ‘they sought’ in ver. 27 
prove nothing however, though they are constantly quoted by 
even the latest critics to prove that the writer is not Nehemiah; 
‘the Levites were sought’ is equally possible according to the 
Hebrew (see on Ezra x. 17). 

Of course there are here many features, words, and expressions 
which abound in Chronicles, as in verses 35 f., 41, &c., but it is im- 
possible to pronounce finally when these features arose in Hebrew 

literature. 

In ‘Chronicles’ we have the close of or at least a late stage in 
along course of evolution in Hebrew thought, usage, and style of 
language. We cannot separate ver. 30 from ver. 31, nor verses 37, 
39f. from ver. 38, so that verses 31 f., 37-40 can be proved to be 
by Nehemiah, and are accepted as such by Ryssel (in Kautzsch), 
Siegfried and Bertholet. Ewald !and Stade? are no doubt right in 
recognizing in verses 27-43 a genuine extract from the Nehe- 
miah memoirs, though later editors have been at work on these 
verses. 

The musical references in this chapter are commonly fathered 
on the Chronicler, but it is time to acknowledge that everything 
of the kind did not first come into existence in the time of the 
Chronicler. The fact that in his time they were in full career im- 
plies a previous period of development : see p. 16f. 


Date OF THE DEDICATION OF THE WALLS. 


It is exceedingly likely that the walls were dedicated almost im- 
mediately after they were completed, asStade®, Bertholet,and most 
recent critics hold. But Rawlinson * and Klostermann® maintain 


1 Gesch.’ iv. 205, A3.  * Gesch. ii. 176. ° Gesch. ii. 175. 
4 On xii. 27. 5 Gesch. 265 f. 


oe 





27 


_ that the dedication took place some twelve years after 
- completion, i. e. after Nehemiah’s second visit to Jerusalem in 


to have the king’s approval for the ceremony of the dedication. — 





The close connexion of verses 27~—43 with the next chapter and 
personal allusion in xiii. 6are said to require this late date. ™ 
over, Nehemiah’s return has been explained as due to his desire 
But one is allowed to deny the cogency of this reasoning, eee 
is based mainly on subjective considerations. The walls + 
finished in vi. 16, and (removing vii. 73°-x to the close of *,, 
the intervening events do not require more than a few m 
One may perhaps infer from 2 Macc. i. 18 that Nehemiah a 
that time (say 80 B. c.) supposed to have dedicated the walls on the — 
twenty-fifth day of the ninth month (Kislew). Now according to 
Neh. vi. 15 the walls were completed on the twenty-fifth of 
the sixth month (Elul). It is not unreasonable to think that ie 
three months after their completion the walls were dedicated. 


27-30. Gathering of musicians. _The priests and Levites purify 
themselves, the people, and the city. 
27. dedication: Heb. khenuka, a late word, non-occurrent in 


' pre-exilic literature, though the cognate verb occurs in ban 
_ ‘| xXx. 5, and in 1 Kings viii. 63. Cf. the proper name ‘ 
7 
. (Heb. Khanok = dedicated?) in Gen. iv. 17f. (J), &e. : and see o 


Ezra vi. 16. =. 
they sought : better use the passive, ‘the Levites weresought,” _ 
&c. In Hebrew it is the impersonal construction (see p. 103). — 
By the Levites in this verse we are to understand one divi- 
sion only of them, viz. the singers (see p. 6r). 
_ with gladness: a rendering (supported by Luc.) involving _ 
a slight change in the text. 
thanuksgivings (see on Ezra iii. 11, x. 1)... singing: the 
two terms express respectively the theme and (lyrical) form of the 
words used. Pss. cxxii, cxlvii have been suggested. 
psalteries ... harps: better, ‘harps... lyres’ (see Peal, 
vol. ii (Century Bible »p. 28. For the instruments named see 
1 Chron, xiii. 8. 
28. Render, ‘And the Levites (so Luc., Guthe, and ? Ber- © 


-tholet) and the singers gathered themselves together, from the 


plain of the Jordan and from round about Jerusalem,’ och. 
sons of the singers.: render, ‘singers’ (see on Ezra i ii, 42). 









iS 
. 
Py 
2 
a 
Ge 
¥ 


‘round about Jerusalem, and from the villages of the 
Netophathites; also from Beth-gilgal,and out of the fields 
of Geba and Azmaveth: for the singers had builded 
them villages round about Jerusalem. And the priests 
and the Levites purified themselves ; and they purified 


_ the people, and the gates, and the wall. Then I brought 
* Or, Gircuit 





In Hebrew the words rendered ‘son’ and ‘sons’ denote one or 


more of a specified class. Thus ‘a son of man (Adam)? =‘aman,’- 


‘sons of man’ (or ‘men as mae In Syriac ‘son of man’ is 


_ almost invariably used for ‘ man. 


x 


‘ 


x 


These singers are identical with the Levites (see the render- 
ing above and ver. 27). 

both: the Heb. word (waw) is that usually translated ‘and,’ 
and should (with Luc.) be placed immediately before ‘round 
aig &c., as the sense requires (see rendering above). 


"NEHEMIAH 12, ban Cre ae 


2 Raihered themselves together, both out of the ® plain - 


a9 


31 


plain : the Heb. word (kikkar, lit. ‘ circuit’) is the technical é 


term for the district around the lower Jordan. Tere is no diffi- © 


culty here or in iii. 22 (see on) arising out of the distance, for 


_ the Jordan is only some twenty-two English miles from Jerusalem, 
- Netophathites : men from Netophah (see on Ezraii. 22). 


29. Beth-gilgal: nowhere else mentioned. Since beth (lit. 


-*house’) means often ‘place,’ ‘situation,’ we are probably to 
_ understand ‘the neighbourhood of Gilgal’; cf. ‘ fields’ (=‘open 
- country’) ‘of Geba ’ (see on Ezra ii, 26). 


Azmaveth : see on Ezra ii. 24. 
30. the priests and the Levites: the post-exilic usage; cf. 
‘the priests the Levites’ in D. 
purified themselves: by sprinkling on themselves sacri- 
ficial blood (see 2 Chron. xxix. 20 24; Ezek. xliii. 195 cf. Ezra vi. 
Io). Priests, Levites, people, gates, and wall had all to undergo 
the same ceremony of purification, as all were to be used in holy 
service. Of course it is ritual purification, that is meant, a con- 
ception brought out very prominently in Lev. xvii-xxvi (H) and 
Ezek. x1-xlviii. 
31-43. The procession around the walls. The company of priests 


_and Levites and princes formed themselves into two companies 


near the Valley Gate, one proceeding towards the right along the 
southern and eastern wall, the other tothe left along the western 
and northern wall, the two companies meeting in an open space 
east of the Temple. 

31-37. Procession of the right-hand party. Where was the 


a 


two great companies that gave thanks and went in 








general rendezvous whence the two bands started their circui " 
the walls? We are not told, but the context makes it extremel 
likely that it was some point near the Valley Gate (see on ii. oe 
as Stade surmised’, It was from this gate that Nehemiah com- 
menced his tour of inspection (see ii. 13), and this might have 
suggested the starting-point of the present dedicatory procession. 

The course of the procession was as follows :— - 

1. The Valley Gate (?). Hae a 

2. Southward (ver. 31). a ts 

3. After reaching the southernmost point a turn was made to. 
the west and thé journey continued to the Dung Gate, which was — 
a little to the north (v. 31). 

4. From the Dung Gaté the Fountain Gate was reached (ver. ny » % 
from which point, instead of following the direction of the gy 
march almost direct northward seems to have been made, perhaps ~ 
because henceforward the road along the wall was too narrow to” 


hold the company, or because the tour round would require too 


much time to allow of the meeting of the parties at the place, 
arranged (ver. 37). 

5. Taking the direct way to the north (‘straight before them,” 
ver. 37), they go as far as the Water Gate, ascending the steps 
leading across Ophel to the city. The processioning companies : 
seem to have come together at the Guard Gate (see on ver. 39). — 

31. princes (i.e. leaders) of Judah: see on Ezra ix, 1. os 

upon (the wall) : so the compound preposition is rightly 
rendered here (as in 2 Chron. xiii. 4; Jonah iv. 6); thus Kish, 
Reuss, Rawl., Oettli, Meinhold, Ryle. | 

But Siegiried and Bertholet hold that the right rendering is is 
‘beyond’ or ‘above’ the wall, i.e, at a point higher than the wall - 
but not on it. 

companies ... right hand: render, ‘ companies’ (MT. 
‘thanksgivings’), ‘and the first went to the right hand,’ &e. A 
change in the Heb. of two words (oné occurring nowhere else and 
certainly corrupt) is all that is necessary for this rendering. 

companies that gave thanks: the one Heb. word so ren- ~ 
dered is translated everywhere except in this chapter ‘ thanks- 
giving,’ ‘ praise,’ and the like (see on Ezra iii. 11 and x. x for the 
verb) ; but as ‘ appointed two thanksgivings’ gives no sense most 
ancient and modern translators have assumed without reason that — r 
in this section the noun means a ‘company giving thanks.’ The — 
present writer thinks the text is wrong, and as instead of tadot a 











; Geek ii. 175: 






a 4 






| NEHEMIAH 12. 32-34. Cy * a7t 


cession ; whereof one went on the right hand upon the 
wall toward the dung gate: and after them went Hoshaiah, 
-and half of the princes of Judah, and Azariah, Ezra, 
and Meshullam, Judah, and Benjamin, and Shemaiah, and 





- (thanksgivings) we should read ‘édot (companies), the word used 
of the company of Korah (Num. xxvi. 9, xxvii. 3) ; of Job’s circle 


32 
33 
34. 


of dependants (Job xvi. 7), and especially of the congregation of 


Israel (lit. ‘a company assembled by appointment’). Any Hebraist 
will see how“etasily the two words could be confounded. The 
Syr. seems to follow the text now for the first time restored, for 
it translates by kenushata=‘ companies.’ 

and went in procession: the one Heb. word here used 
‘occurs nowhere else. Read (making a slight change), ‘and the 
one (or the first) went’ (on the right hand). There is then no 
_ need for italics. 
. right hand: i.e. the south (see 1 Sam. xxiii. 24), The 
_ Hebrews named the four quarters of the heavens according to the 
position of one gazing to the east (a survival, perhaps, of sun- 
worship). Thus left hand=north (Joshua xix. 27, &c.), the front 
_=east, and the hinder part = west (see Isa. ix. rr). 

But they named these also on other principles. Thus the east is 
often called the direction of sun-rising (»isvakh), the west the 
_*sea’ (because the Mediterranean was west of Palestine), the 

south davom (= 1), and WVegeb, the dry (i.e.sunny) part, the north 
having usually the designation sa@phou, ‘the hidden’ (from the 
light of the sun) ‘ part.’ 

: dung gate: see on il. 13. 

32. (after) them: i.e. the musicians. 

_ Hoshaiah: we know nothing further of him, though he 
appears as the leader of the princes in this company, as Nehemiah 

was in the other company, another illustration of the defective 
_ state of our knowledge of the period. Perhaps, however, we are 
to think ofa house so called and not of one man. ; 

33. and Azariah ... Jeremiah: these seven names repre- 
_ sent priestly houses corresponding to the seven priestly houses in 
_ the other company (see ver. 41). The text has fallen into some 
confusion. SoGuthe, Bertholet. Princes’ houses are not mentioned. 
: Azariah . . . Meshullam: mentioned among the priestly 
houses which signed the covenant (see x. 3, 8). 

- Ezra: a house or family so called (see verses 1, 13; cf. x. 2). 

34. Judah ... Benjamin: these tribal names stand here for 
houses. Bertholet regards the occurrence of these names as a 
_ proof of the unhistorical character of the whole list. 

Shemaiah : see ver, 6. 


ws 


D 


=," 


~ 


35 Jeremiah, and certain of the priests’ s 


3 of God; and Ezra the scribe was before them: and b 
_ the fountain gate, and straight before them, they went up 


~ son of Mattaniah, the son of Micaiah, the son of Zz 
_ 86the son of Asaph; and his brethren, Shemaiah 










Zechariah the son of Jonathan, the son of She ma’ 


Azarel, Milalai, Gilalai, Maai, Nethanel, and J 
Hanani, with the exdsival instruments of David the 


_ by the stairs of the city of David, at the going up of the 
PP 5. | & 
Jeremiah : see verses 1, 13 and x. 3. re ig 

35. priests’ sons: render ‘ priests,’ and see on ver. 28. “We 
have the names of these priestly houses in verses 33 f. (see on - 
ver. 34). S 

with trumpets: see on Ezra iii. to. 

Zechariah: here, as being Asaphite, the clan cannot be 
priestly as one of the same name in the other company is (See 
ver. 41). See on ver. 34. 

36. Milalai: we should probably (with Luc.) omit - this 


~name as a dittograph of Gilalai (more alike in Hebrew than in 
. English). We then get eight Asaphite names, as in the other 


company (ver. 42). 
with the musical instruments to the end of the verse 
is thought by Meyer!, Siegfried, and Bertholet to be an addi-_ # 


_ tion by the Chronicler, who out of respect to Ezra (though he is 


not once mentioned in * Chronicles *) gives him here an important 
position. Certainly the introduction of Ezra’s name here is un- 
historical, if the individual is meant, and in any case the neg 
assigned to Ezra here has been already alloted to Hoshaiah (ver.32 
A late editor, living at a time when Ezra came to be regarded : 
the second Moses, desired to give him a position in this aed 
pany similar to that of Nehemiah in the party of the left hand. and. 
The man Ezra nowhere appears in the present context, oe 
David the man of God: see ver. 24. : 
37. fountain gate: see onii. 15. 
straight before them: instead of following the course of 
the walls the procession now strikes a path due north, hous 
what reason we are not told (see p. 270). 
stairs, &c.: see on iii. 15. 
city of David: see on iii. 15. 
at the going up, &c. : at a part of the wall that covered 
elevation of ‘ground. 










1 Die - Entstehung, ‘&e. -» P--200. 


~ NEHEMIAH 12. 38, 39. Cy 273 





wall, above the house of David, even unto the water gate 
eastward. And the other company of them that gave 38 
thanks went to meet them, and'I after them, with the . 
half of the people, upon the wall, above the tower of- 
_ the furnaces, even unto the broad wall ; and-above the 39 
_ gate of Ephraim, and by the old gate, and by the fish 


7 


' gate, and the tower of Hananel, and the ‘tower of * Ham- 
; ® Or, The hundred 





above the house of David: i.e. the traditional site, some 
ruins of which were then perhaps to be seen. It is possible that 
some well-known private house had this name. 
The party leaves the wall at the ascent referred to, passing 
northwards by the site of the royal palace. Kent denies that the 
procession left the wall at all until the other company was_ 
reached ; but he depends for proof on notions of Jerusalem 
_ topography which are now universally discarded. 
above (the house, &c.): we have here in Hebrew the same 
combination of prepositions as that rendered ‘upon’ in ver. 31 
(See on). 


38-43. Procession of the left-hand (northern) party. 
_ 38. company of them that gave thanks: read ‘company,’ 
and see on ver. 31. 
went: follows a slightly but rightly corrected text. 
to meet them: read (making a small change) ‘on the left’ 
(to the north : see on ver. 3r). The Hebrew word in the M.T. 
_ is in its present form a monstrosity, and has no meaning. 
with the half of the people: i. e. as many princes, priests, 
- and Levites as belonged to the right-hand party (see 32ff.). 
There is not the slightest need (with Guthe, Bertholet, and Léhr) 
to read ‘with the half of the princes of the people,’ The half 
_ extends here to all the classes enumerated in 32 ff. 
t above: i.e. some distance from ; the same double preposition 
- translated ‘ upon’ in ver. 31 (see on). 
tower of the furnaces: see on ili, 11. 
broad wall: see on iii. 8. 
39. gate of Ephraim: see oniii.6. As it is not mentioned 
in Nehemiah’s tour.of inspection the word above (the gate, &c.) 
_ implies probably that this gate did not lie in line with the wall 
_ here spoken of, but some distance to the south. 
the old gate: see oniii. 6. 
fish gate : see on iii, 3. 
tower of Hananel... tower of Hammeah .. . sheep gate: 
~ see on ili, 1, 
Eee T2 


s 





them that gave thanks in the house of God, and I,; 
41 the half of the * rulers with me: and the priests, Eliak 
__  Maaseiah, Miniamin, Micaiah, Elioenai, Zechariah, and 

42 Hananiah, with trumpets ; and Maaseiah, and Shemaiah, 

and Eleazar, and Uzzi, and Jehohanan, and Malchijah 
and Elam, and Ezer. And thesingers sang loud, with | 

43 Jezrahiah their overseer. And they offered great sacri. 

_ fices that day, and rejoiced ; for God had made them — 


_ 


rejoice with great joy; and the women also and the ~ 
children rejoiced: so that the joy of Jerusalem was Deane 7 3 


even afar off. on > 
4 Or, deputies a X 
stood still: better, ‘ ‘entered’ : see on Ezraiii, to; cf. next verse. 
gate of the guard: better, ‘ prison gate.’ This cannot be 
the wall gate leading directly into the guard court (see on iii, 25), _ 
for that would fix it too much to the south. Probably we are to 
understand the ‘gate of Hammephkad ’ (see on iii. gt), i.e. 
gate opposite to the prison, and it is likely that the original 
Hebrew text read accordingly, the beginning of both names being 
identical. The Hebrew word has come into the present text ? 
through the influence of ili. 25. 
40. stood: see on ver. 39. The two bands entered the Prison 
Gate and formed one company in the Temple area, * 
companies of them that gave thanks: read ‘ companigay? 
and see on ver, 31. 
in the house of God: to be attached to the preceding verb _ 
‘entered’ (E.VV. stood). ; 
In verses 40-42 we have the same order as in the description of 
the procession of the right-hand (south) party: (1) The musicians, 
(2) Nehemiah and half the rulers, (3) Priests, (4) Levites. 
41. with trumpets: see on Ezra iii. 10. . 
42. sang loud: lit., ‘caused (those round about) to hear’; see 
t Chron. xv. 19. ? a 
43. great sacrifices: see Ezra vi. 17. ‘ | 
God had made them rejoice: sce viii. 12, 17; Ezra vi. 22; 
2 Chron. xx. 27. 
women... children: see viii. 2, x. 29- <9 
joy : i.e. its manifestation. q se 
afar off: see Ezra iii, 13. 








ae 








“And on bat a were men Spuented over the Me 
chambers for the treasures, for the heave offerings, for 
the firstfruits, and for the tithes, to gather into them, 
according to the fields of the cities the portions ®appointed 
by the law for the priests and Levites : for Judah rejoiced 
for the priests and for the Levites that bwaited. And thers 45 

2 Heb. of the law. > Heb. stood. 


> = — 











- This section bears in a special degree the marks of late editing, 
as do the following three verses, and Kosters, Torrey, Meyer, 
and Bertholet have no hesitation in ascribing ver. 44~-xiii. 3 to 
_ the Chronicler as a kind of historical support for xiii. 4 ff., 10 ff.; 
- see especially ver. 47. 

_ 44. Those appointed over the treasure chambers in this verse _ 
_ had to see that the Temple dues brought were safely housed, 


va 


? 


distribution of what was brought. 
a chambers, or ‘cells’: see on iii. 30 and Ezra viii. 29. 
treasures (= stores) and heave offerings seem both general 
_ terms, the second restricting the first to such as were sacred 
_ offerings, and the latter being further defined as ‘ firstfruits, ' coe 
heave offerings: better ‘sacred gifts’ or ‘ contributions’ : 
_ See on x. 37. 
, firstfruits: see x. 38, where the same Hebrew word occurs; t 
_ and on x. 37, where another Hebrew word (‘first ripe fruits’), 
_ often similarly translated, is found. 
tithes : see on x. 37f. 
% according to the fields, &c.: the gifts were sorted in the 


_ chambers according to the localities which supplied them. The 


” Versions and many MSS. read ‘ according to the princes,’ &c. 
‘ the portions : see ver. 47. The Hebrew word is written 


' rather peculiarly, but no difference is meant, and the variations of , ~ 


' spelling are explainable. 


Judah rejoiced: a very naive remark if (as seems likely) we 
are to see here the hand of a priest. 
that waited: lit. ‘that stood’: see 1 Chron. vi. 32f. (Heb., 
verses 17f.), and for the full phrase ‘to stand before Yahweh’ 
=‘ to serve’) see Deut. x. 8. It is generally used of the priests 
when performing their duties in the Temple. Cf. Milton’s 
‘They also serve who stand and wait.’ 
(‘On his Blindness.’) 
45. See 2 Chron. xiii. rr. Render, ‘And they took ota of 
¥ the service of their God and of the purification,’ &c. 





Ba ,, PROVISION FOR THE SUPPORT OF THE TEMPLE OFFICIALS. 


whereas the ‘treasurers’ in xiii. 13 were to preside over the is) 








ow 


47 giving unto God. And all Israel in the dayerteth 


the commandment of David, and of Solomon’ 
46 For in the days of David and Asaph of old * there 


_ proper as distinct from the Levites. Ezekiel’s term is ‘Zadokites’ — 









kept the ward of their God, and the ¥ 
tion, and so did the singers and the porters, ¢ 


chief of the singers, and songs of praise and 


Zerubbabel, and in the days of Nehemiah, gave the ~ 


portions of the singers and the porters, as every day — 
required: and they sanctified for the Levites; and the — 
Levites sanctified for the sons of Aaron. Se 

® Another reading is, there were chiefs. at 








Se 
kept the ward: lit. ‘they kept the thing to be kept.” The — 
verb has often the meaning ‘ to discharge the duties of an office,” — 


especially of the priesthood: see Num. iii, 10, xviii. 7, Soc. — 


Hence the verb with its cognate noun, as here, Lev. viii. 35, &c., 
means simply to perform the duties entrusted to them as priests, — 
Levites, &c. oP 
purification: see 1 Chron, xxiii. 28. Be 
according to the commandment of David and of Solomon: 
see 1 Chron. xxiii-xxvi ; 2 Chron. viii. 14. ‘ 
46. Render, ‘For in the days of David Asaph in the olden c 


is 


_time was chief,’ &c. : 


and ( (Asaph) : - omit with the Greek (both LXX and ims 


. Syriac, and Vulgate versions and one Hebrew Cod. The two : 


time references seem redundant. Bertholet renders, ‘For in the © 
days of David and Asaph the chiefs (adding the consonant) of the ¥ 
singers were appointed (inserting one letter in the Hebrew 

rendered of old) (with reference to) the songs of praise,’ &e. 
But with the changes he proposes the last part of the verse hi : 
in thé air, ‘and songs,’ &c. fae 

For chief the qr, Vulg., and- many MSS. read the plural x 
‘chiefs.’ 

47. The editor wishes to make it quite plain that from the 
time of Zerubbabel to that of Nehemiah the Temple dues — 
paid. 

sanctified: i.e. set apart: see Luke xxvii, 14, 16 ff.; 1 Chron. 
XXVi. 27. 
sons of Aaron: i.e. Aaronites, P’s word for the priests — 













(or sons of Zadok). ae 


ee NEHEMIAH ga oe 







Re [U] On that day they read in the book of Moses in 13 
| the audience of the people; and therein was found 
“written, that an Ammonite and a Moabite should not 





|. XIII. For general remarks as to the relation of this chapter to 
~ ch. x see pp. 242 ff. 
| 1-3. Exclusion of the mixed multitude. 
This section supplies an excellent introduction to verses 4-9, 
_ and, whether or not by Nehemiah, was placed where it is because 
it refers to the law which was Nehemiah’s authority in excluding 
Tobiah (the Ammonite) from the Temple chamber. 
_ Many wouldremove these three verses from their present setting. 
W. Robertson Smith ', followed essentially by Geissler?, and at 
one time by Bertholet*, would insert verses 1f. between Ezra ix. 
9 and 10, or thereabouts. Kosters thought verses 1-3 should intro- 
_ duce Neh. ix f., while Marquart would join the whole of xiii te 
Ezra ix f. But one may expect the law to have been read by 
other leaders than Ezra, and, indeed, as often as the conduct of the ~ 
_ people called for special reference to its requirements. There is ~ 
' surely no necessity to think that the evil of mixed marriages was 
- dealt with on only one or two special occasions in the life of Ezra 
and Nehemiah. Moreover, the steps which are now taken differ 
_ from anything previously done, and the Scripture referred to is also 
different. The walls had been dedicated and certain regulations 
made for the support of the clergy of all grades (xii. 44-47)—what 
more natural than to set about the purification of the community 
from all non-Jewish elements ? 
_ If we are to remove verses 1-3, the most suitable place for 
them next to their present one is after ver. 9, so that Nehemiah’s 
“treatment of Tobiah would supply the occasion for the course 
described in ver. 3. The words ‘before this,’ &c., might have 
been inserted after verses 1-3 got to be where they are. 

1. On that day: the reference is general, as in xii. 44, unless 
verses. 1-3 are placed after ver. 9, in which case the day when 
Nehemiah excluded Tobiah will be meant. 

in the book of Moses: see on viii. 1. 

found written : i.e. in Deut. xxiii. 3-5. Note the large use 
made in Ezra-Nehemiah of Deuteronomy. 

Ammonite: Tobiah (see verses 4 ff.) was an Ammonite: 
see on ii. to. 

Moabite: Bertholet thinks that Sanballat was a Moabite 
and that he is in the writer’s mind here. But it is unlikely that 
he was a Moabite at all. See on ii. co. 





Bs Oda CC.) 427,-n 2. 2p. 45: 5 On Deut. xxiii. 4-7. 








; rater, but hired Balaam against them, to curse 
_ 3 howbeit our God turned the curse into a blessing. 

“came to pass, when they had heard the law, that, the 
4 separated from Israel all the mixed multitude. ‘s 
[N| Now before this, Eliashib the priest, who | Wwe 


i the assembly (of God): see on Ezra ii. 64, where the sam 
word is translated ‘ congregation. . A 
2. because they met not, &c-: Ammonites and Moabites are 
excluded here on the ground of an historical episode, but accord-— 
ing to Deut. xxiii. 2 (cf. with Gen. xix. go ff, (J)) as the chides ’ 
of incest, the latter ground being the more ancient, 
’ 3. the mixed multitude: the Hebrew word here ¢ 
occurs nowhere else in Ezra-Nehemiah, a reason for re 
this as a section apart from what has preceded. In Jer. xxv. 20 
the word is used of the foreign population settled in Egypt for 
» trade and other purposes, In Jer. 1. 37 and in Ezek. xxx. 5 
_ (though Cornill reads ‘Arabs’ in the latter passage) it —s 
foreigners residing in Babylon. Apart from the immediate con- ~ 
nexion one might conclude from general usage that the 
means here non-Jews in and around Jerusalem who had 
kind of status in the community (or assembly) of Yahweh, ‘But 
in the light of the context we must interpret the word to mean — 
all whose pure Jewish blood had been in any way compromised — 
by mixed marriages, though the latter might have belonged to 
: a former and even a remote generation. Meyer’, altering the | 
vowels of the word, reads ‘ Arabs,’ i. e. Bedouin Arabs. But to — 
speak of the separation of Israel from the Arabs, especially after : 
* the allusion to Ammonites and Moabites, would seem 
strange! The word in the sense here implied occurs only in| 
passages mentioned above. In Lev. xiii. 52, &c. (P) it d 
the vee of a garment. 


Tobiah’s possessions cast out of the Temple chamber ape 

About 433 8.c. Nehemiah had for some unknown feston 
returned to the court at Susa. During his absence many i 
larities had arisen, and in the remainder of this chapter we 
an account of measures adopted after his return for remo iz 
some of them. Since the sacred dues had ceased to be paid (see 
verses 10-13) the chambers were no longer required for their 
usual purposes, so that Tobiah had been allowed to occupy cet 


e 





1 p. 130. 





eat % » 
’ ‘ 


Pe OUNEVIEMIAH 4a, 308. 0-2) agg 





_ appointed over the ®chambers of the house of our God, 
_ being allied unto Tobiah, had prepared for him a great 5 
_ chamber, where aforetime they laid the meal offerings, 


' the frankincense, and the vessels, and the tithes of the 
* Heb. chamber. 


Or more, making them one large one: see ver. 5. Tobiah was 
~ doubly disqualified for using the chambers in the Temple 
enclosure, for he was neither a priest nor Levite, nor was he even 
a Jew (see on ii. 10). 
4. Eliashib the priest: it is agreed among scholars that the 
well-known high-priest of that name is meant (see on Ezra x. 6), 
though Herzfeld! denies this. It is possible that the word ‘high’ 
has fallen out before priest. As regards his having charge of 
the Temple chambers (cells), we know too little of the duties of- 
the priesthood and high-priesthood of the time to conclude that 
the office here ascribed to Eliashib shows he was but an ordinary 
priest taking his turn with other priests. 
chambers: see on Ezra vili. 29. 
; being allied, &c.: no one knows how, though many con- 
jectures have been hazarded: see Ber.-Rys., Winckler?, and Ryle. 
5. a great chamber: probably two or more smaller ones had 
been thrown into one by the removal of the separating walls. In 
these chambers, before they had been made one, sacred gifts of 
various kinds had been stored, but now these had been put away 
to make room for Tobiah’s ‘ household stuff’ (ver. 8). 
meal offerings: render, ‘offerings.’ The word has here, asin 
Malachi, the general sense which it bears in the older codes, In P 
it denotes cereal as opposed to flesh offerings, Weare here, there- 
fore, in this verse at an earlier stage of custom and law than that 
which meets us in P and related writings (Chron. &c.): seep. 18 f. 
frankincense : lit. ‘ what is white,’ so called from its colour, 
- Our ‘Albion’ has the same consonants and perhaps(?) the sameety- 
mology as the Hebrew word here used (/ebonah), The word stands 
Strictly for a sweet-smelling gum or resin, obtained by exudation 
from various species of the Boswellia, a tree closely allied to the 
terebinth. It formed one ingredient of incense (see Exod. xxx. 
34), but was offered also alone as a separate species of sacrifice, 
(see Isa. xliii. 23, Ixvi. 3; Jer. vi. 20). These references show that 
the present passage is not necessarily later than Nehemiah’s time 
and hardly as late as the Priestly Code. The word translated 
“*incense’ (geforet) is used in pre-exilic writings for sacrificial 
smoke and nothing else. In P it means certain spices burnt to 
afford Yahweh a sweet odour. Such sacrifices as these—frankin- 





1 Geschichte®), ii. 146. 2 Al& Orient. Forsch. i. 233: 






6 and the heave offerings for the priests. But j in-2 
time 1 was not at Jerusalem: for in the two and thirti 
year of Artaxerxes king of Babylon I went unto # 
king, and after certain days asked I leave of the king: 

7 and I came to Jerusalem, and understood of the evil 

_- that Eliashib had done for Tobiah, in preparing him a 

_ 8 chamber in the courts of the house of God. And it grieved 

me sore: therefore I cast forth all the household stuff 
9 of Tobiah out of the chamber. Then I commanded, and 

_~-they cleansed the chambers: and thither brought I again” 

: the vessels of the house of God, with the meal offerings 

- toand the frankincense. And I perceived that the portions 


cense, &c.—originated among the Hebrews and Arabs at a com- 
"paratively late period, as they imply an advanced stage of civiliza- 
tion and consequent luxury *. 
tithes : see on x. 32f. 

6. Artaxerxes: see Ezra vii. 1. 

Babylon: to the Hebrews this city would continue to 
appear as the capital of the Eastern world. 

after certain days: lit. ‘at the end of days,’ the words - 

| being used vaguely for an indefinite period, as in 1 Kings xvii. 7; 

cf, Gen. iv.3. Marquart reads ‘at the end of his days,’ i.e. when — 

the time of his furlough had expired. 

7. chamber: see on iii. 30. 

courts: read (with LXX, Guthe, &c.), ‘court.’ The Temple 
court is meant. 

8. household stuff: probably what is chiefly, if not pees 
sively, meant is the véssels, &c., used in sacrifice. eo] 
10-14. Nehemiah 74 tidal the payment to the Temple officials — 

of their dues. 

This section explains how Tobiah was able to appropriate for 
his own use the large chamber (see on ver. 5) which was allotted — 
him by Eliashib. The firstfruits, tithes, &c., had ceased to be © 
paid (verses 10-13), so that the Temple storehouses (see on ver. we 
were no longer required for their ordinary purposes. 

The fact that Nehemiah reproaches the people (ver. 11) for 


+= : 


1 According to Sayce they existed among the Babylonians and : 
Egyptians as far back as B.C. 3000. ly 











Levites and the singers, that did the work, were fled 
every one to his field. Then contended I with the 
*rulers, and said, Why is the house of God forsaken? 

And I gathered them together, and set them in their 


“place. Then brought all Judah the tithe of the corn and 
® Or, deputies 





neglecting to pay their contributions shows that laws regulating 
such contributions had been made and proclaimed, i. e. verses 10- 

_ 14 in the present chapter presuppose x. 37-39 (see p. 277). 

10. portions: see on xii. 44. 

2 the Levites: since the priests were to receive a tithe ot 
the Levites’ tithe (see x. 37-39) it is surprising that we do not 

_ read of their losses as well as those of the Levites: see at p. 243. 

But it is exceedingly likely that the word Levites has here its 
wider sense and includes both priests and Levites. Theaddition 

_ of singers (probably ‘and porters’ must be added), as distinet 

. from porters, lends support to this view. 

Z were fled every one to his field: this is a confirmation of what 
is said in xi. rf. Up to the time when the walls were completed 
Jerusalem was very thinly populated, the great mass of the Jewish 

_ community, official and lay, residing in the country and supporting 

_ themselves on their several plots of land or otherwise. Priests and 

- others had transferred themselves to the capital, and arrangements 

_ for their maintenance had been made, which in Nehemiah’s absence 
hadnot been observed,so that they were obliged toreturn to the land. 

According to the Deuteronomic code, priests (including Levites 
who are in that code synonymous with them) were to have no 


f the Levites had not been. given thew: 3280 that the" 


| NEHEMIAH 13. i,12, N- 281 


inheritance, but to depend for their support on altar dues, &c. (see _ 


- Deut. xviii. 1 ff.). But after the destruction of the Temple religious 
as well as political organizations fell to pieces, so that for a long 
' period after the exile the priests and Levites had to earn their own 
living. In Ezek. and in the P code (see Num. xxxv) certain cities 
_ Were set apart for the Levites. 
31. contended I, &c. : see verses 17, 2I, 25. 
rulers: Heb, seganint: see on ii. 16 and on Ezra ix. 1, where 
another word (rendered ‘ princes’) with the same meaning occurs, 
_. Why is the house of God forsaken? See on x. 39. 
- (i gathered) them: i.e. the Levites : see on ver, Io. 
mS and set them in their place: i.e. restored them to their 
- Temple posts. 


12. Judah: i.e. the lay part of the community of the return, 


_ the gola, though it included some who were never out of the land: 
- see on i, 2 and on vi. 21 ; cf. xii. 31, 44. 





i 








Zadok the scribe, and of the Levites, Pedaiah: and 
* to them was Hanan the son of Zaccur, the son of 

iah: for they were counted faithful, and their bu: 
14 was to distribute unto their brethren. Remember me, 
O my God, concerning this, and wipe not out my * good. 
deeds that I have done ior the house of my Goll aes 


for the observances thereof. PP 
15 In those days saw I in Judah some treading winepresses 
® Heb. kindnesses. F 


iS ae 
treasuries: the same Hebrew word is rightly rendered 
‘treasures’ in xii. 44. Here it means rooms (chambers) where 
the treasures (firstfruits, tithes, &c.) were stored : see ver. 5, xi 
44; 2 Chron. xxxii. 27. wy 
13. I made treasurers: the one Hebrew word (a verb ex- 
plained as a denominative of the noun =‘ treasure”) occurs nowhere 
else, and it is better (with LXX Cod. &, Zwe., Syr., Ryssel, 
Klostermann, Guthe- Batten) to read, ‘1 appointed over the 
treasuries Shelemiah,’ &e. 
Shelemiah, Zadok, and Hanan are mentioned in the same, 
connexion among those that repaired the wall: see iii. 29 f. ete 
Zadok was, like Ezra, a priest (see ili. 295 cf. vii. 40) and. 
. “a scribe (see on Ezra vii. 6). a 
- Pedaiah: see viii. 4. 
i next to them: lit. ‘at their hand, ready to help’: see on 
iti. 2, where the words seem to have a different sense ; cf. xi. 24, 


a 


‘at theking’s hand” ~ aS 
Zaccur : see xii. 35. ie? 
, Mattaniah : see xi. 17, xii. 8, 25, 38. >? ee 
’ Ryle thinks that Shelemiah represented the Temple priests, 


” Zadok the ‘judicial’ section of the priests, Pedaiah the Levites 
proper, and Hanan the singers and porters. 

14. See on v. 19. We have such a prayer at the cepa! of 
each description of a reform due to Nehemiah: see verses M4 
22, 31. 

15-22. Provisions made for the strict observance of the Sabbath 
among the Hebrews. See on x. 31, and for a history of Sy 

* _ Hebrew Sabbath on ix. 14. 
. 15. in Judah: the provisions were prepared in the cc 
parts and then brought on the Sabbath day into Jerusalem, ~ <> 
treading winepresses : see Lam, i. 15; Isa. lxiii. 2. — 






fe ae 





_ NEHEMIAH 13. 16,17. N + 283 
‘on the sabbath, and bringing in * sheaves, and lading asses 
therewith 3; as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner 
of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the 
sabbath day: and I testified against them in the day 
wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt men of Tyre 16 
‘also therein, which brought in fish, and all manner of 
“ware, and sold on the sabbath unto the children of 
Judah, and in Jerusalem. Then I contended with the 17 


nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is 
: 2 Or, heaps of corn 





process of making wine the grapes were placed in a stone recep- 
tacle called gai (Eng. ‘ wine-press’) and afterwards trodden with 
bare feet. The juice thus obtained passed into a lower receptacle 
‘called yegeb (Eng. ‘ wine-vat’). Often wine-press and wine-vat 
were hewn out of the solid rock iz situ. The E.VV. do not con- 
sistently observe the distinction between these words, for yegeb 
(‘ wine-vat’) is called ‘wine-press’ in some nine or ten cases, 
e.g. Num. xviii. 27, 30; Deut. xv. 14; Judges vii, 21; Job v. 2; 
Jer. xlviii. 31, &c. 
bringing in: i.e. harvesting. 

_ Sheaves: the margin is better. 

The order in which the treading of wine-presses and the — 
‘in-gathering of corn is mentioned here is not that of nature, as 
the vintage is later than the corn harvest by many weeks. : 

I testified, &c. : Hebrew idiom requires that the verb should 
be followed by the preposition translated ‘in’ (the day). It 
would make the construction simpler and the sense clearer if we 
‘read with-Bertholet (making a few changes): ‘And I testified 
‘against them when they sold victuals.’ The M.T. is understood to ~ 
‘Say that the goods brought into Jerusalem were not sold until 
ssome day in the following week; but the construction is singular 
and vague, as the English will show. Bertheau, Schultz, Ryssel, 
and Ryle thought that no actual selling took place on the Sabbath, 
but ver. 16 proves the contrary. 

16. men of Tyre: perhaps descendants of those who helped in 
the rebuilding of the Temple (Ezra iii. 7); or they may have 
“settled in the city to receive and sell (dried) fish sent them by 
kinsmen. ‘Sidon’ (near Tyre) means probably ‘ Fishing town! 

the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem: omit and with 

Arab., Syr., Vulg., and some MSS., rendering ‘the Judahites in 
Jerusalem.’ 

17. nobles: see on ii, 16, Nehemiah concentrates his censure 


: 












your fathers hee, and did not our God eine all th 
_ Upon us, and upon this city ? yet ye Pista mo 


before the sabbath, I commanded that the doors 

___ be shut, and commanded that they should not be . 

- till after the sabbath: and some of my servants set I 

over the gates, that there should no burden be b 

20 in on the sabbath day. So the merchants and sellers of 
__all kind of ware lodged without Jerusalem once or | 

21 Then I testified against them, and said unto ts 

lodge ye “about the wall? if ye do so again, I vil 
hands on you. From that time forth came they no 


220n the sabbath. And I commanded the Levites oe 
" Heb. before, 


on them because they were responsible for the existing state si 


things. ae 
profane: secularize, i.e. treat the Sabbath as an ordinary de 
18. See Jer. xvii. 21 ff. and cf. Ezra’s prayer (Ezra ix. 








and Nehemiah’s (x). aie 
‘ your fathers...our God: note the striking coatesalgalt 
pronouns. Tas 


upon us: i.e. upon our nation, LXX®, Luc., Guthe ok 
‘upon them and upon us.’ 

19-22, The regulations made by Nehemiah. 

19. when the gates... began to be dark: more ate 
‘as soon as the gates . began to have shadows on them,’ 
have darkness on them. ; 

The gates were large stone structures with doors on eithers 
and usually a large one inthecentre. It was through the secon 
that passengers entered, the ordinary traffic (horses, &c.) 
through the central door, or rather gate : see on Vi. i. 

20. Though goods could not be brought into the city 
Sabbath, the people went out to buy, so that the Sabbath - 
broken all the same. 

i What were the Levites commanded to do? 

- To cleanse themselves ceremonially: see Ezra'vi. 20; B 
xii. 'g0. 
2. Having temporarily appointed some of his own 













NEHEMIAH 13. 23-25. N eg 
they should purify themselves, and that they should come 
and keep the gates, to sanctify the sabbath day. Re 
member unto me, O my God, this also, and spare 
me according to the greatness of thy mercy. 

In those days also saw I the Jews that *had married 
women of Ashdod, of Ammon, avd of Moab: and their 
children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could — 
not speak in the Jews’ language, but according to the lan- 
guage of each people. And I contended with them, and 


beursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked 
® Heb. had made to dwell with them. » Or, reviled 








(see on iv. 16) to guard the gates during the Sabbath, Nehemiah 
made permanent appointment of some Levites to undertake the 
task. Reuss thinks that it is the Temple gates alone that the 
Levites are here commanded to watch, but through these gates 
goods for sale could hardly be brought. It must be admitted, 
however, that the Hebrew is strange. 


23-29. Nehemiah’s strenuous protest against mixed marriages: 
see ix. 2, x. 28, 30; Ezra ix. 1 ff., x. 1 ff. 
28. saw I: perhaps during a tour of inspection (see ver. 15). 
_ had married: see R.Vm. and on Ezra x. 2. 
24. their children: the marriages were of some standing, as 
the children were old enough to be able to speak. 
__ speech of Ashdod: perhaps a dialectical variety of Hebrew, 
but as we have no specimen of it its real character must always 
remain a problem 1. 
the Jews’ language: such Heb. as Nehemiah spoke and 
wrote. It is a great mistake to think that the Jews spoke Aramaic 
and not Hebrew after the return, though that was once the common 
view. Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, and Nehemiah are written in © 
excellent Hebrew, and so is most of Ezra. 
according to the language: an awkward sentence, and 
probably (with the LXX) to be rejected as a gloss. The words 
can mean only that the other half spoke in the languages or dialects 
of the Ammonites and Moabites. 
25. I contended: see verses II, 17. 
cursed them: i.e.the men. The same verb occurs in ver. 2, 
Mal. iii. 9, iv. 6. The curse would be conditional (see on x. 29), 





‘An Egyptian inscription of the 26th Dynasty (cir. B.c. 660) 
mentions the language of the Philistines as a distinct form of speech 
—so says Professor Sayce. 


Es 


286 a 








Beechall not give your dengtiet unto 
nor take their daughters for your sons, or for yours 
26 Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these 1 
yet among many nations was there no king like hin 
and he was beloved of his God, and God made him 
king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did 
27 women cause to sin. Shall we then hearken unto you to 
do all this great evil, to trespass against our God in. 
a8 marrying strange women? And one of the sons 
_ Joiada, the son of Eliashib the high priest, was son in 
to Sanballat the Horonite: therefore I chased him foe: 


i: SETI EEIDETEEEIEREEEETEE 
‘M May - ye suffer... if ye put not away your strange wives.’ bn 
same verb in another species (Hiph.) means to treat with cont 
lit., ‘to make little of’ (a Welsh idiom), and Gesenius, Dathe, L 
and others so explain here (see R.Vm). But without altering the 
vowels it can hardly have this sense here. 

smote: in Egypt, Palestine, &c., persons are whipped sale 
the koorbash and struck with the hand in a way that would bes 
firmly resented in the West by the most menial. 
plucked off their hair: sce on Ezra ix. 3. 
26. Did not Solomon, &c. : see 1 Kings xi, 1-8, iii. 17 ; Sam. 
Xil. 25. 
no king like him: see 1 Kingsiii. 12f.; 2 Chron. i. 12, 
strange (=‘foreign’) women: see on Ezra X. 2. ; 
27. Shall we then hearken, &c.: the verb is in form either 
passive third per. sing. or active first per. plur. Weshould 
render, ‘As regards you (first for emphasis) is it (=can it be) 
reported that ye do all this,’ &c. (see Deut. iv. 32): so Bertheau, 
Ryssel, Bertholet, &c. But Siegfried and others prefer to follow the 
LXX, Vulg., and the E.VV., rendering ‘Shall we then li 
you’ Gi e. your pleadings, &c.), ‘ that you may do,’ &c. * If Solomon 
failed to avoid the connecting ‘evils, is itlikely that you will?* 
28. Eliashib the high priest: the latter words can as ‘well, 
according to the Heb., go with Joiada (xii. 10), so that it ane 
certain that Eliashib was at the time alive. 
Sanballat: see on ii. ro. : : 
I chased him, &e.: i. e. apparently, ‘ I expelled him from 
the community.’ 
Itis with this incident that Josephus * connects the bua - 






: 
} 
f 


* 













1 Antig. xi.-7, 23 Vv. 8, 2f 





et NEHEMIAH 13. Peet N 284 


‘me. Remember them, O my God, * because they have 29 
defiled the priesthood, and the covenant of the priest-— 


hood, and of the Levites. Thus cleansed I them from 30_ 


ball strangers, and appointed wards for the priests and for 


‘the Levites, every one in his work; and for the wood 3 


offering, at times appointed,-and for the firstfruits. 
Remember me, O my God, for good. 
~® Heb. for the defilings of &c. > Or, every thing strange 





the Temple on Mount Gerizim in the time of Alexander the Great. 
But it is probable that he confounds the present incident with the 
expulsion of Manasses in 330 B.c. 
29. Remember, &c.: in abad sense, as in vi. 14. Contrast the 
force of the same verb in ver. 31, &c. 
defiled the priesthood: see Lev. xx. 13-15. Joiada, if not 
now high-priest, was to hold that position after his father’s death. 
the covenant of, &c.: render, ‘the covenant of the priests 
(so Luc., Guthe) and of the Levites’ (see Mal. ii. 4-9, and Deut. 
XXxXiil. 9). 
30f. Nehemiah’s own résumé of the work he did. 
30. (cleansed I) them: i.e. the priests and Levites. 
from all strangers : Heb. ‘from everything foreign,’ i. e. 
foreign Wives, religious rites, &c. 
wards : successive watches or courses of priests and Levites 
(see on xii. 44f.). 
in his work: i.e. Temple service. Better (with LXX8, Luc, 
Guthe), ‘ according to his work.’ The change is of one cousonant 
for another almost exactly like it. 
31. the wood offering: see on x. 34. 
firstfruits : see on x. 35-37. 
Remember me, Kc. : see verses 14, 22, v. 19. 





INTRODUCTION : 


ae cc AN 


~N 





YE ror 


~ 








| Se ESTHER 








INTRODUCTION 


I. NAME OF THE BOOK. 


'  Tuis book is called in the Talm. B! Megillat Ester, or 
| “The Roll of Esther’ (see under next section). It is also 
_ called by way of pre-eminence ‘ The Roll,’ on account of 
_ the peculiar respect in which it was held. 

"In editions of the Hebrew Bible it is called simply 
‘Esther,’ as it is also in the Greek versions. In the 
_ Syriac (Pesh.) and Vulg. the title is ‘ Book of Esther.’ ~ 

' Inthe enlarged version of the book current among the 
_ Alexandrians the name ‘ The Epistle of Purim’ seems to 
~ have been given it, from a misunderstanding of Esther ix. 
20, 29 (see on). But this title never came into general 

use, even at Alexandria. 


II. PLACE IN THE CANON. 


_ In our Hebrew Bible this book appears last of the five 
; ‘rolls’ (JZegi//oZ), all of which are in the third ‘Canon’ 
of the O.T., that called the Kefudim (‘writings’) or 
_ Hagiographa (‘ Holy Things,’ so called on account of the 
presence of the Psalms init). The first of the five rolls 
" tobe so called was Esther, which received the name ‘ The 
Roll’ at this time when, through its connexion with Purim, 
it came to be written on a separate parchment roll. On 
_ account of its being read during Purim? the term ‘ roll" 
"came to be applied to four other books read on other 
festivals as follows:—(1) Canticles, read on Passover; 


1 Baba Bathra, xiv B. 
? The rules for the reading are given in full in the Talmudic 
Tract Megillah. 


7 < 














on the ninth of Ab, the day set ‘Apate Sor ees com) 
tion of the devirunea of Jerusalem in 586; (4) Q e 
(Ecclesiastes), read during the Feast! of Tabernacles. x 
other positions of this book in the MSS. and other « 
tions of the Hebrew and Greek a see Ryle, on 

Canon of the O.T.%, p. 292 ff.; &e. nee 

In the Talm. B. Berak. 57 B, we even eabtad arrange 
ment of the Ketubim (Hagiographia). 

1. The large ‘ K.’ (Psalms, Proverbs, Job). ry 

2. The small ‘ K.’ (Canticles, Qoheleth, and 7 
tations). 

In his valuable work on the Canon (7),2 Profesior (oe 
Bishop) Ryle makes a mistake in substituting Esther 
for Lamentations in (2) above. : ial ae 

The Talmudic passage is translated and ravi on 
by the present writer in Zhe Juterpreter, July, 1909. © ‘ 

Esther is among the Axtélegomena, or disputed. ’ 
of the Hebrew Canon, the others being Ezekiel, Jonah, 
Proverbs, Canticles, and Qoheleth. The right of. Esther 
toa place in the Canon was contested by many leading” 
Jews and Christians down to the fourth century of our 
era. Paton (p. 97) affirms, what neither he nor any one 
else has proved, that the Jewish Synod held at Jamnia in 
A.D. 90 decreed this book to be canonical. It is absent | 
from the list of O.T. books given by representative Jews to 
Melito, Bishop of Sardis (d. a. D. 175), and in the fourth” 
century both Athanasius and Gregory Nazianzen * (a. 389). : 
denied it to be canonical. In the Eastern Church its 
canonicity was a matter of dispute even in the “Middle + 

Ages, for it was stoutly denied by Nicephorus Callistus * 
(d. cévca 1330), though its recognition in the West was _ 
~ finally secured through its acceptance by the ‘Cour of 
ae (A. D. 397). A: 



















293. 
2 2 RRR Canon, &c., 77: A 
5 Westcott, The Bible in the Church PB 
y u j 






ICRION aus 


DOné ae to bear in mind the folowing features of the 

book to understand the suspicio 
" regarded alike by Jews and Christians, 

r, _ I. The Divine Being is not once mentioned or referred 

to from end to end of the book (this applies, however, to 

~ I Macc. also in critical texts) : see on vi 4 

__ 2. No other part of the O.T. is referred to in this book, 


= 








‘ not even the Zora, nor is anything said about Jerusalem, 
_ the Temple, Sacribcs, or about any festival except Purim, 
_ which has a secular origin and has no sancivon in the 
< Torah, &c. 

3. The book is not once quoted in the N.T., a state- 


_ ment which, however, is equally true of Canticles, Qohe- 
¥ leth, Ezra, Nehemiah, and even the prophetical books — 


_ Obadiah, Nahum, and Zephaniah. 
__ 4 Moreimportant than the absence of religious phrase- 
- ology and of the religious spirit is the presence throughout 
_ the book of a low ethical standard. It is true that the 
_ treachery and cruelty of Haman are by implication con- 
_ demned, but the writer gloats over the equal cruelty of 
_ Mordecai and Esther. Nothing seems wrong if only it 
_ furthers the advancement of the Jews—not of Judaism— 
_ for this last there is no concern whatever. 
It is not, therefore, surprising that Luther wished the 

_ book did not exist, and that Ewald? said of it: ‘Its story 
knows nothing of high and puretruths. In it we fall as 
if from heaven to earth.’ 

The book would never have been admitted into the 
_ Canon at all but that it gives an ostensible account of the 

origin of the Purim Feast, which the Jews had made 

religious, and supplies reasons for its observance. 


a 


Nevertheless in quite early times Esther came to occupy — 


S 


_ a position in the esteem and veneration of Jews second to 
‘the Zorah (Pentateuch) alone, a position which it con- 
tinues to hold. Rabbi b. Lakish (cévca A.D. 300) says 

_ that Esther stands next to the Zora, while Maimonides 


af 1 History (Eng. Trans.), i. 197. 


Bisbee 


with which it was _ 


204 : PEST 


(d. A.D. 1204) says tat whieh, the 
other books of the O,f. may pass away; 
-and Esther will abide for ever. t 







APOCRYPHAL ADDITIONS TO ESTHER. 


In the oldest and best MSS. of the LXX (B.A, the 
‘Sinaitic, &e,) the book of Esther is much larger than in the © 
M.T., for it contains 270 verses as compared with 163 i in 
the Behan text. These additions are scattered through- — 
out the bg’ am and have for aim the supplying of the reli-_ 
gious element which in the book is quite lacking. In — 
yeapimes version and in the Vulg., which is based on it, © 
fae longest and most important of these additions are ~ 
taken out of their context and put together at the end of | 
the Canonical book, thus making them in a large measure — 
unintelligible. In English, Welsh, and other modern 
versions not dependent on the Vulg., the above additions 
appear in the Apocrypha (‘The Rest of the Chapters of — 
the Book of Esther’). The editions of the LXX by — 
Tischendorf-Nestle, Swete, &c., include these parts, and — 
place them in their original connexion, which is thearrange- _ 
ment followed in the English translation of the LXX by — 
Brereton. Thompson’s English LXX leaves out the — 
Apocrypha altogether, rendering the canonical parts only of 
the Greek Bible. ‘The Rest of... Esther’ is soobviously 
a later attempt to correct the non-religious character of ~ 
the original Esther that no modern scholar defends their — 
genuineness or could do so with any show of reason. | 
In the notes on Esther in the present’ volume the 
Apocryphal parts of the book are indicated by square — 
brackets in the context in which they occur in the LXX, 
thus [Apoc. Esther xi. 2-xii.6], In Swete’s edition they 
are designated by the letters A, B, &c., as followsi— 
A (Lat. Eng. xi/ 2—xii. 6): Mordeett ae re 
came to honour ; precedes Esther i. I. 
B (Lat. Eng. xiii, 1-7) : Letter of Artaxerxes faliows. . 
Esther iii. 13. 





e-{ == “INTRODUCTION, 295 





© (Lat. Eng. xiii. 8-xiv. 19): The prayers of Mordecai 

and Esther ; follows Esther iv. 17. 

-_D (Lat. xv. 4-19, Eng. xvi. 1-16): Esther visits the 

‘king and wins his favour; follows C, preceding immedi- 
ately Esther v. 

H (Lat. Eng. xvi. 1-24): Letter of Artaxerxes ; follows 
Esther viii. 12 

F (Lat. Eng. x. 4-xi): Epilogue describing the estab- 
lishment of Purim ; follows Esther x. 3. 

Besides the lengthy interpolations noticed above there 
are also in the LXX small additions which are omitted 
from the Latin version and therefore from the English and 
Welsh Apocrypha, these additions being for the most 
part explanatory glosses. There are also in the LXX 
numerous omissions of words and sentences found in the 

-M.T. A careful study of the additions and of the omis- 
sions makes it evident that the M.T.represents the original ~ 
’ text of the book. 
Modern scholars almost to a man agree that the‘ Addi- 
‘tions’ are some decades later in date (say 100.B.C.) than 
the Canonical Esther, though they owe their existence to 
the same movement of thought and feeling as those which 
“prompted our Esther and the many Targums and 
Midrashes on the book. _ Some writers (chiefly Roman 
Catholic divines. like Langen, Kaulen, and Scholtz) 
“maintain that the original language of the ‘ Additions’ 
: was Hebrew or Aramaic. But a careful study of the text 
-makes it plain that, its language is that of one writing 
originally in Greek and not translating. And many other 
considerations confirm the conclusion thus reached, See 
Ryssel, Kautzsch. Apoc., i. 193 ff., and Fuller, Speaker's 
_~ Bible, Apoc. i. 36? ff. 


III. ABSTRACT OF CONTENTS, 


The book gives the history of Esther and her. cousin 
Mordecai, and tells how the former became Xerxes’ queen 
and Mordecai that king’s grand vizier, and how both 











- deliverance the Feast of Purim was established. 


- cally one voice that the purpose contemplated in 












massacre planned by Hatiat in prerebeicr 


For more detailed analysis see the annotations ( 
text in which the various sections and subsecti 
Esther and the ‘ Rest of Esther’ are laid out and 
marized. bey 

IV. AIM AND CHARACTER OF THE BOOK. — ak 

The Commentaries and Introductions say with a 
this book was to supply motives for the keeping of the Fe 
Purim. But this is a superficial view to take. Why ould 
the Jews of the circle to which the writer belonged be _ 
obsessed by a desire to make ¢his particular festiv th , 
about which their law says nothing, permanent?) And 
why with sucha desire was such a book as Esther written ? 
To the first question the present writer’s answer is that this 
institution had become a part of the nation’s life and “s 
could not be suppressed. The question would naturally — 
arise, If this feast of heathen origin and with heathen — 
suggestions #zust de tolerated, how can it be emptied of 
its heathen contents and be made the channel thr 
which Jewish patriotism, such as had been recently di 
played in the Maccabean wars, should be expressed and 
reinforced? That was the task the writer seems to have > q 
set before him, and in the Hebrew Esther we have his 
attempt to perform it—an admirable attempt too, judged 
from the literary and every other point of view, thot * 
times the author is guilty of inconsistencies and anachron- * 
isms which will be pointed out and commented on in the e 
notes. AP | 









aptatt er vigil 








Esther is therefore a didactic romance, a novel w oe: 
purpose, like many of the novels of Charles Seat 
Dickens, and George Eliot. " 


question the answer of the older commentators 
‘ és er 
many moder has been ‘ Yes’ (Havers » Keil, C 


x 





oSince the time of Semler (Professor at ‘Halle, d d. pom 
= Faho made a vigorous onslaught upon the historicity of the 
5 book, scholars have come more and more to regard Esther 
4 as a romance, composed to set forth and illustrate the 
ideas the author wished to have connected with Purim, 
_ An intermediate position is taken up by many scholars 
(Schultz, &c.), viz. that there is a basis of fact in the book, 
_ though the latter is to a large extent the work of the 
_writer’s imagination, controlled, of course, by his purpose. 
~ No one has up to the present been able to find out this 
~ nucleus of fact and to support it from external sources. 
The historical background of the book is almost certainly 
_ the patriotism evoked by the Maccabean wars, as Spinoza}, 
_ that marvellous forerunner in philosophy, science, and 
biblical criticism, surmised, though he assigned a simi- 
lar date for Ezra-Nehemiah, which is absurd, as well as 
for Daniel, which is reasonable. 
The following considerations make it impossible to 
_ regard Esther as a record of actual occurrences. 
_ ‘3. The period implied is that of Xerxes I (see on i. 1), 
_ who reigned from 485 to 465. But its second hero, Mor- 
_ decai, is:said to have been one of the exiles taken with 
_ Jehoiachin in 597 (ii. 6). This would make Mordecai 
when he first comes before us in this book some 130 years 
_ old and Esther, who won the king’s heart by her virgin 
charms; 7° at least! Rawlinson’s way out of this 
difficulty is not a happy one (see Speaker's Comm. on 
_ ii. 6). 
2, According to'this book (i. 12) women and men could 
not eat together, even in Persia; but we know from 
ancient historians? that this is contrary to fact. The 
_ writer transfers the habits of his own time and country to 
_ atime and country which do not suit, though for his own 
immediate purpose it matters little, if anything. 
3. Persian history knows nothing of any queen of Xerxes 


3 1 See Tvactatus Theol,-Pol. cap. x. . ? Her. ix. T10f., &e. 


298 









divorced, was afterwards restored. i Lis 

4 Persian law required that the king should take k is 
wife or wives from one of seven Persian noble families, so 
that it would have been rer. for Esther, a Jenene "a 
become a Persian queen.? 4 

5. It is very improbable that Esther could for so tenga’ 
time have concealed her relationship with Mordecai and ~ 
her Jewish descent from court, king, and people (see on 
ii. IO). re 

6. What purpose could be served by keeping the virgin 
candidates in a kind of quarantine for a whole year ? ‘See 
on ii. 12. 

7. It is unlikely, to say the least, that either Hated es 
- Amalekite (see on iii. 1) or Mordecai the Jew should have 
risen to be the chief ruler in Persia next to Xerxes, and in 
non-biblical history there is no intimation that a 5 
the kind took place or could take place. 

8. It is improbable that the whole of Susa should meer. 
been so deeply stirred by episodes in the history of the — 
Jewish population, and only a Jew could have written — 
iii. 15 and viii. 15, and that with a view to national glori- 
fication. Oe oe 

9.In the hundred and twenty provinces of Persia (see — 
on i. 1) and the eighty days’ banquet (see on i. 14) we 
have other examples of the writer’s tendency towards 
exaggerated statements, so as to give piquancy to his _ 
tale. 3: 

1o. That the king should have quite forgotten ‘ie 2 
benefactor who had saved his life (ii. 21 ff. and vi. ‘ ff.) i is 
another of the improbabilities of the book. ata, 


+e 
:s 





V. UNITY AND INTEGRITY.. 


With the exception of small parts (words, ein ind : 


some verses) the whole of the book as it appears in the : 


1 Her. vii. 14; ix. E12, 









APT 


“INTRODUCTION | 


me is aksowledued to be by one writer as far as 
‘ix.19. Most modern critics regard ix. 20-32.as belonging 
“to a different source: so J. D. Michaelis, Kamphausen,. 
“Ryssel, Oettli, Kdnig, Wildeboer, Baudissin, and Paton, _ 
the latter including, as must be done, x. 1-3. The 
grounds on which these writers go refer to language and 
subject-matter. 

-.& There are in ix. 20ff. words and expressions not 

found in the earlier part of the book, and, on the contrary, 

“many words and expressions common in-the earlier part 

are here absent. See an excellent list in Paton, 59 f. 

_ 2. As regards the contents, there are items in ix. 20ff.- 

inconsistent with what has gone before. According to 

vii, 15 and ix. 14, Haman and his sons were impaled at 

different times, but ix. 25 seems to mean that they were 

“impaled all at one time. In vi. 12-viii, 2 Esther comes 
‘before us as the deliverer of the Jews, but in ix. 25 she is 
“not even mentioned in connexion with the affair. The 

_king’s sentence upon Haman in vii. 8f. and ix. 25 appears 
‘to be different and to imply a different source: see further 

Paton, 57 ff. It must be owned, however, that the contra- 
dictions pointed out by recent writers are not very mani- 

_ fest in many cases, and it has to be borne in mind that 

there are inconsistencies in i-ix. 19, as Paton himself 

admits. Thus, in ii. 5 Mordecai is one of the captives of 

5973 im Vili. 2, 123 years later, he becomes chief minister 
of Persia and displays in his policy all the vigour of 
“a young man. 

It should be added that ix. 20-x. 3 does not seem very 
essential to the completeness of the book, and it looks 
much like an addition made at a later time when Purim 

_was kept by Jews generally during two days. 





ee 


VI. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 


“The book was written about 130 B.C. The evidence 
for this is of two kinds, external and internal. 





1 Com. 72. 





— 





: (13th Adar) was followed by Mordecai’s day, 







2 Macc. xv, 36, where we read that Nican 


Purim. Now this Apocryphal book is not much ol 
than the commencement of the Christian era. In 1 Sir. 
xliv-xli (date circa 180 B.C.) there is a long list of Israel’s” 
worthies, but the names of Esther and Mordecai a 2 
lacking, almost certainly because the Book of Esther had : 
not been written. A footnote to the Greek Esther says 

that the book was brought to Egypt in the fourth year of © 
Ptolemy and Cleopatra (i. e. probably Ptolemy Philometor, t 
d. 146). This reference shows that Esther was in circu- 


__ lation by the end of the second century B.C., if not earlier. 


Josephus (d.cévca A.D. 95) was well acquainted wa 
this book and looked upon it as ancient. 

2. INTERNAL EVIDENCE. (1) Zhe style. Though the 
author makes a courageous attempt to write in the 
Hebrew of an earlier time—the time, in fact, of Xerxes %. 
(d. 495)—and avoids some words characteristic of his | 
own day (e.g. the short relative sk, &c.), yet the book | 
abounds ir late words (Aramaisms, &c.). See the Intro~ 


_ ductions of Kuenen (Dutch and German) and Driver, 











and the commentaries of Ber.-Rys., and Paton. reanes 
The Hebrew of Esther resembles closely that of ; 
Chronicles, Daniel, and especially that of Ecclesiastes, 
only that as this book is the latest, in the O. T. it 
some fresh marks of a later date. 2 age : 
(2) Matter. The book reflects a period of © 
national spirit and pride, a rebound from a feeling of 
depression and shame which seems to have but recently 
passed away. Some great victory on the part of the Jews: 
over their foes appears to be at the back of the book 


to form a large part of the inspiration of the writer. — “oo ; 
a state of things existed about 130 B. C., at the close 


INTRODUCTION jor 





‘the Maccabean wars, and this date or one near it has 
been generally fixed upon by recent scholars. The 
embittered narrow national sentiment of the book suits 
no period so well as this one. 

The references to Jewish proselytes in viii. 17 and ix. 27 
prove that the book could not have been written earlier 
than the third century B.C. 

That the author was a Jew is made evident by the 
intense nationalism which he displays and also by the 
excellent Hebrew in which he writes. ii. 5 gives some 
support to the view that he was a Benjamite. The fact 
that he makes no reference to Jerusalem, the Temple, 
sacrifice, or the feasts, goes far to prove that he was 
not a resident at Jerusalem, or even in Palestine. The 
Persian words he uses and the Persian complexion which 
the book bears makes it likely that he had lived long in 
Persia, though more than that one may not say with any 
confidence. 


VII. THE FEAST PURIM AND THE WORD ‘ PuR.’ 


The present writer has of set purpose held back his 
necessarily brief discussion of thé above points to the 
close of this Introduction, as he is of opinion that a clear 
conception of the aim and drift of this book can be 
obtained without their consideration. Opinions on both 
these questions have been so numerous and conflicting 
that they are greatly in danger of hiding the main issue 
and of confusing the reader. In order to understand the 
plays of Shakespeare one is not bound to know all or 
much about the sources which he has used, though for 
a history of the plays, as for a history of the rise of 
Esther, a study of sources is unavoidable. For the view 
‘of the book which has been given’ it is necessary to 
assume that the Feast of Purim is of non-Jewish origin, but 
that it came to have such vogue among Jews that it could 





1 p. 206. 


“302 










not be got rid of. It was 5 thereiare'’ made int 
feast and commended by a romance based on Bat 
(or Persian?) mythology, which served to express | 
foster the patriotism which recent events had called tes 
Many scholars, however, hold that this feast arose for 
first time on Jewish ground, most of these holding with 
J. D. Michaelis, Reuss, &c., that it was instituted to- 
commemorate the victory of Judas Maccabaeus over” 
Nicanor, general of the Syrian army, on the 13th Adar, 
161 B.C.! Paul Haupt ably and interestingly defends this 
view in his Purim.? If, however, the festival had a Jewish | 
origin it must have received a Jewish name. But Pur is 
admittedly not a Hebrew word, and Haupt himself 
derives it from ‘an old Persian equivalent of the Vedic 
pirti= portion’: so Purim = portions, gifts (Esther 
ix. 19, 22). Moreover, no Jew at this period of national 
awakening and of narrow national zeal would havedreamt — 
of calling in a tale based on heathen mythology to bolster _ 
up a native feast. 

The view which commands the strongest support 
among modern scholars is that which regards Purim as ~ 
the continuation of the Babylonian New Year’s Feast Zag- 
muk held in the month Nisan (March-April : see on Ezra 
x. 9,17). So Zimmern %, Jensen, Néldeke, Winckler, and 
Frazer‘. Zimimern, following a hint of Lagarde, derived 
~ur from the Babylonian Jukhru (‘an assembly’), another 
name of the above Babylonian feast, so called because « on 
that day the gods, presided over by Marduk, met in- 
assembly to decide by lot the events of the opening year. 
It is, however, hard to see how purcan come from pukhru, 
and Zimmern has now abandoned this etymology®. 

Zimmern further connects the names ‘Mordecai? and 

‘Marduk *,” and the names ‘Esther’ and lange as is. 


os. 





1 See x Mac. Vii. 40-45; Jos Aniig. xii. 408. 

2 8vo, pp. 53, Leipzig, 1906. 5 Stade’s ZATW. Lar 159M 
* Golden Bough®, iii. p. 151 ff. 5 See KAT.G. ees 

6 Ib. 395; see on Esther ii. 5. 


etn 









now Ret done. “Jensen has pointed out the interesting 
_ coincidence that Marduk and Ishtar are cousins. But it 
must be admitted that Marduk the god and Mordecai the 
_Jew play very different parts, and it is to be noted that 
| Zagmuk was held in the very beginning of Nisan, Purim 
in the middle of the preceding month. “ 
_ Jensen has developed the theory of Zimmern still further, 
_making, however, many modifications as well as additions. 
He holds that in Esther the principal source is, Baby- 
lonian, but that Elamite mythology has been also drawn 
upon, and in particular the Gilgame¥ legend, which 
_ Jensen makes the source of most of the tales in the O.T., 
the //ad, and of even the life of Christ. Hadassah, 
_ Esther’s other name = the Babylonian Aadashatu, bride, 
used as a title for goddesses. 
_ Haman = Humban or Humman, the chief god of the 
_ Elamites, in whose chief city, Susa, the events of the book 
occur (yet Haman was no god!).. Vashti is connected 
path the Mashti or Vashti of the Elamite inscriptions. 
_ Other names in the book are similarly explained. Jensen 
derives Pur from a hypothetical Babylonian puru or buru 
_ = ‘astone,’ then (but what proof is there of this ?) ‘a lot’; 
: but we now know that the word should be read dartz. 

Bruno Meissner}, adopting most of what Zimmern says, 
holds that we have at the basis of Esther an Ishtar, not 
: a Marduk legend. 

Lagarde traces the Purim Feast to the Persian All- 
Saints Festival held in honour of the departed, and the 
_ word Zur to the Persian name of that Feast of the Dead, 
_ Farwardigén. In this etymology he was, however, anti- 

cipated by von Hammer in 1872,” and even. by. that 
/ rare English theologian and Orientalist, Thomas Hyde 
~ (d. 1703), who assisted Walton in his Polyglot, and wrote 
"a very learned -work in Latin on the ‘Religion of the 
_ Ancient Persians.’ But this derivation has been proved 


| - ZDMG. 1896, p. 266, &c. 2 Wien. Jahvb, fiir Lit. 
PO SBE ores 


2 





“INTRODUCTION = gog_ 


394 “es 
to be philologically impossible ', and Lagarde him: ve 
it up in later years in favour of an'etymology (the Mandaic 
puhré, meal) said to be akin to that afterwards ad 
by Hommel and Zimmern * (pukhru, ‘a festive bebe sy 

Schwally* accepts Zimmern’s former etymology pukhri, 
but with it combines Lagarde’s identification of the feasts 
Purimand the Persian FarwardigAn. Inboththereis feasting, — 
in the latter the dead being supposed to share (cf. Jer.xvi. 7); | 
in both presents were exchanged. With Schwally, as later 
with Jensen, the descent of Gilgame¥ into the lower world 
suggested the doctrine of the resurrection’. The absence 
of Divine names from the book is to be attributed (Schwally — 
thinks) to the unwillingness of Jewish scholars to admit 
the book into the Canon unless the name of God was leftout — 
of a composition admittedly based on the cult of ancestors. 

Gratz’s theory of a Greek origin for Purim (= Pithorgia) 
and his Hebrew etymology of the word (furah, ‘winepress,’ 

_ So previously J. D. Michaelis) have found no followers. 

For full and excellent discussions of the whole question 
see Introductions to the commentaries of Wildeboer and 
Paton, and the monographs by Paul Haupt (already 
mentioned), Wilhelm Erbt, Die Purimsage in der Bibel 
(Berlin, 1900), and (from the Jewish conservative point of 
view) Sigmund Jampel, Die Beurteilung des Estherbuches, 
und des Purimfestes (Pressburg, 1905). 

For interesting accounts of the mediaeval and nish 
observance of Purim see I. Abraham’s Jewish Life in the 
Middle Ages, p. 260 ff. (he calls it the Jewish Carnival), 
Jewish Encyc. ‘Purim,’ and The Home and Synagogue of 
the Modern Jew, p. 139 ff. The thirteenth day is observed 
as a fast.. On the fourteenth the Roll of Esther is read. 
The fifteenth is kept as a very merry day, many excesses 
(drinking, &c.) being often indulged in. 










1 See Haupt, of. cit, p. ar. 2 ZATW., 1891, 157 7 ff. 
> Das Leben nach dem Tode (1892), p. 42-5. 

* See this matter ably discussed by Orr, The Resureyeae “ 
af Jesus, 24a ff 





INTRODUCTION 305 
For list of abbreviations see pp. 35 ff. 


LITERATURE. 


The following is a list of the important exegetical works on 
| Esther used by the author, most of them referred to in the 
notes. The present writer has consulted many other works, 
ancient and modern, though in every case he has tried to give 
his own judgement after consulting the text, versions, Tar- 
gums, é&c. 

The commentaries by the following include Esther as well 
as Ezra-Nehemiah (see p. 36) :— 
Adeney, W. F., Bertheau and Ber.-Rys., Kamphausen, Keil, 

Oettli, Rawlinson, F. W. Schultz, Siegfried. 


- Note besides commentaries on Esther by the following :— 


Cassel, D. : Trans. by A. Bernstein. 
Haley, J. W. (and others): Many useful hints and references. 
Paton, L. B. (T. & T. Clark): The most up-to-date com- 
mentary existing and the fullest in English, though the 
writer withholds his own opinion too much or it is lost 
in the details of other opinions. 
Scholz, A. (German) : Contains a great mass of materials, but 
very fanciful in its interpretations. 
Streane, A. W.: Camb. Bible, short but good and reliable. 
Wildeboer, D. G. (German): Brief but scholarly. 
The following new and suggestive essay came into the 
-author’s hands as the proofs of the present work were being 
corrected :—Le Prologue—Cadre des Mille et Une Nuits: Les 
" Legendes perses et Le Livre d’Esther, par J. Cosquin, Paris, 
Ig09: See p. 363. 





4 


Commentary the passages are mentioned as above 


re 







®* Or, Xerxes Heb, Ahashverosh. 





{Apoc, Esther xi. 2-xii. 6. Mordecai’s dream ; i 3 nse | 
in which he secured the king's favour.]* 


Cu, I. Tue Kine Makes Two Banguets (1-8) AND THE Queen 
'. ONE(9). THE QUEEN PUT AWAY FOR HER ‘Disonepienee 3 
THE Kinc (10-22). 


1-4. The king's banquet for his officials. 

1. Now it came to pass: the Hebrew for this is that usually 
‘translated ‘And it came to pass,’ and it implies generally a ¢ 
nexion with something preceding. It suitably begins the tone? 
books Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Nehemiah, since such a con-— 


_-nexion exists, but this is not the case in the first verse of Ruth, 


Ezekiel, Jonah, or in the present verse. In fact “waw consecu- — 
“tive ’ construction became in course of time a tense form pure and 
simple, and it should be here so regarded. Render therefore, — 
‘It came to pass,’ &c. In non-Semitic languages, including classi- _ 
cal (not Hellenistic, but cf. the views of Deissmann, Thumb an and 
Moulton) Greek, the main verb would not be thus introduced, — 


~ Arab., Heb., &e., instead of saying ‘And Jesus spake’ would 


prefer, ‘And it came to pass that Jesus spake.’ oe 
Ahasuerus: though the LXX, Jos., render Araneae, 
Ezra iv. 7) no other king than Xerxes (485-465 B. c.) can be m 


_ This has been generally admitted by scholars from a com on 


of what is said in Herodotus, &c., and in this book. Of no other | 
Persian king could the author of Esther write as he doesof the king» 
mentioned in this verse. The question has, however, been finally f 
set at rest by the deciphering of the trilingual acne oes 
Behistun, in the Babylonian column of which the name o 
king appears in a form differing very little from the Heb 
(Akhashwerosh), here transliterated Ahasuerus : see on Ezra iv. 6. 
. this is Ahasuerus, &c.: added to distinguish him foot 
others with the same name. as 


1 The Apocryphal additions occur in the LXX where ; 





brackets. 





ESTHER 1. 2,3 “aaa 307 ay 
— which reigned, from India eyen unto Ethiopia, ys 


P “over an hundred and seven and twenty provinces :) that. as a 
_in those days, when the king Ahasuerus sat on the throne 


_ of his kingdom, which was in Shushan the “palace, in the 3 2 


third year of his reign, he made a feast unto all-his 
| pemmecs and his servants ; the power of Persia and Media, 
.. 2 Or, castle 


ce from India... Ethiopia, an hundred and seven and 
_ twenty provinces: so viii. 9, Apoc. Esther xiii. 1, xvi. 1, and (of 
~ Darius Hystaspis) 1 Esd. iii. 2, India (Heb. Hoddu, from the 
_ Old Pers.) denotes here, as in classical geography; the territory 
watered by the seven streams of the Indus (whence it gets its” 
_mame) and not the entire peninsula now so called. Ethiopia 
: ' (Heb. Kush) stands for Nubia. 
over: omit; itis not in the Heb. The following words are 
_ simply an explanation of from India even unto Ethiopia. 
= = The phrasean hundredand Seven and twenty provinces (see 
_ the other examples of its use) is a gross exaggeration, exceeded, 
_ however, by Josephus, who says! that Darius the Mede exercised 
_ rule over 360 provinces, though in the present passage he agrees 
- with the M. T. According to Dan. vi. 2 the kingdom of Darius the 
_ Mede contained 120 provinces. Herodotus ?, on the other hand, 
says that Darius divided his kingdom into 20 satrapies, and con- 
_ temporary Darius inscriptions confirm this. It is quite possible ~ 
' that we are here, as certainly in Ezra ii. 1, Neh. vii. 6, to under- 
stand sub-satrapies. But we have no non-biblical confirmation of 
such usage except in Josephus, who follows the O.T. almost 
_ exclusively. 
2. Shushan the palace: better, ‘Susa the fortress.’ In ix 
_ the fortified part of Susa (ver. 7) is distinguished from the rest of 
_ Susa (ver. 15) ; see on ii. 5 andon Neh. i, 2. 
3. in the third year: i. e. in 483. 
feast: lit. ‘a drinking meal,’ ‘a symposium,’ because drink- 
ing wine, &c., formed the principal part. But (see on v. 4) what ~ 
was the purpose of so representative a banquet? No one knows, ~ 
~ though many guesses have been made. 
princes: render, ‘officials’ (see on Ezra ix. 1). Govern-- 
_ ment officials are meant. 
Servants: members of the royal court, stewards, and the 





‘ 


» 
‘ 





1 Aniig. x. 11. 5; lit., ‘He (Daniel) was one of the three satraps 
whom he (Darius the Mede) appointed over the 360 satrapies.’ 


2 iii. » 89. : 









the nobles and princes of the oe 
4 him: when he shewed the riches of his glorious ie 
and the honour of his excellent majesty many days, even | 
5 an hundred and fourscore days. And when these days 

were fulfilled, the king made a feast unto all the people 
that were present in Shushan the palace, both great and 
small, seven days, in the court of the garden of the king’s 





like, courtiers (see iii. 21, iv. 11, v. 115 © Kings v. 15; Jers 
24, 6cc. 

* hg power of Persia, &c.: read (with Ryss., Buhl, &e.), 
(servants) and the officers of the army of Persia,’ &c. The words - 
corresponding to ‘and the officers of’ have fallen out by es ae 

raph | 
e Eieente and Media: a Medo-Persian kingdom was founded 
by Cyaxares the Mede (635-584). In 549 Cyrus the Persian 
became head of what came to be known as the equivalent of Perso- 
Media or Persia and Media. 

nobles: the word in the M.T. is a Hebrew form of the 
Persian = ‘first men.’ The members of the aristocracy are 
meant. 
4. Render, ‘ When he showed (them) his glorious royal wealth 
and the costliness (lit. ‘ preciousness ’) of his majesty’s apparel.’ 
an hundred and fourscore days: not, of course, to be 
understood literally—it is part ofthe romance. No banquet could” 
last so long which had in it so many government functionaries 
from all parts of the known world. Clericus tries to evade the q 
difficulty by imagining that the guests partook of the banquet in 
successive batches, but there is no hint of that here. : 


5-8. The king's banquet for non-official residents and visitors— 
the people, &c. It is possible, and is usually taken for granted, 
that the participants in the first banquet shared also in this, but it 
seems to the present writer improbable. ms 

5. that were present: the Heb. (=‘that could be found’) in- 
cludes visitors as well as residents (see on Ezra viii. 25). 

in the court, &c.: in the enclosed court paved with mosaic » 
which (court) formed part of the park or ‘ paradise’ surrounding 
the royal palace (see Xen. Cyro. i. 3, 12, 14). 

6. The text is evidently very corrupt, and every critical editor 
has his own way of restoring (?) it. The following rendering in- 
volves changes which are few and for the most part vouched for 
in the versions : ‘The awnings were of blue cotton fastened *| 
participle, though singular, may in good Hebrew qualify 


‘awn: _ 
“cd ee nae 
Seer eS ee 








g blue, fastened with cords of fine linen and purple to 
si ver rings and pillars of marble: the couches were of 
gold and silver, upon a pavement of red, and white, and 


yellow, and black marble. And they gave them drink in 7 


ce ; there were hangings of *white cloth, of green, and 6 





“vessels of gold, (the vessels being diverse one from — 


another, ) and royal wine in abundance, according to the 


a 
= 


ss 
> 


3 
Jn 


~ 


bounty of the king. And the drinking was according 8 _ 4 


bi a Or, fine cloth, white and blue » Or, cotton 
 °©Or, of porphyry, and white marble, and alabaster, and stone of 
blue colour 4 Heb. hand. ; 





"ings ’) ‘by purple linen cords’ (omit ‘and’ before ‘ purple”) ‘to 
_ silver rings (or rods?) and (to) white marble pillars.’ 
§ white cloth: Heb. (one word) ‘whiteness.’ Read, ‘awnings,’ 
the Heb. word for the latter (y*r7‘oth) could be easily read for that 
‘in the M.T. in a blurred copy. 
: of green: the word in the M.T. is Persian and means 
_ €cotton.’ 
-and (of blue): omit and join ‘cotton’ to ‘blue,’ ‘cotton of 
blue’ =(in Heb. idiom) ‘blue (or purple) cotton.’ 
_ ings: this rendering is supported by Cant. v. 14 (where 
_ alone the word occurs besides here), by the etymology and by the 
sense. There were rings attached to the marble pillars, and to 
_ these the linen cords were fastened. The awnings would serve to: 
_ keep off the intense heat and blaze of the sun. 
couches: i. e. divans on which the ancient Persians reclined 
: during meals. The custom, though not originally a Hebrew one, 
“existed among the Hebrews in the eighth century B.c. (see Amos vi. 
_ 4), and in later times was universal among the Jews. It is still usual 
_ in Palestine, &c. The couches were. made of solid gold and silver; 
not merely covered with cloth of gold and silver. Herodotus 
_ speaks of gold and silver couches and tables among the Persians. 
__ pon a pavement: render, ‘upon a mosaic pavement of 
alabaster and white marble and mother-of-pearl and black marble.’ 
_ The words characterizing the pavement are names of materials, 
- of the terms denote as they occur nowhere else in the O. T. : 
af the vessels being diverse: this was the case on very 
grand occasions. In banquets depicted on the monuments the 
vessels are uniform in size, shape, and material. ; 
___ (according to the) bounty: lit. ‘hand,’ i. e. means of the 
Ee Soii. 18; 1 Kings x. 13; cf. Neh. ii. 8. ’ 


at 


‘Se 
s ee 
Weer eet ae — * 





ot of colours, though there is uncertainty as to what exactlysome 


310 







- 9 do according to every man’s pleasure. Also hi : 
queen made a feast for the women in the royal ‘house 
10 which belonged to king Ahasuerus. On the seventh day, 
when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he 
“commanded Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha, and 
Abagtha, Zethar, and Carcas, the seven = chaniberianey 


‘rae 


* Or, eunuchs (and so in ver. 12, &c.) 


= 





8. (according to) the law: i.e. that made for the present occa-_ 
sion. The ancient Persians are known from Herodotus and others 
to have been heavy drinkers, and at banquets each guest was ex- 
pected to drink at least a certain minimum quantity. Dota 
feast there was perfect freedom on the matter. 


9. Vashti's banquet for the women : why this separate woldeitis 
feast, for in Xerxes’ time women in Persia could eat and drink with 
men? It was hardly, as some suppose, because there was no room : 
perhaps the writer unconsciously projects into the picture drawn ; 
the customs of his own country and time. 

Vashti: Xerxes’ wife according to Herodotus? was Amestris, | 
which may be the same word varied by phonetic changes and in 
part by corruption. Jensen identifies the name with that of the © 

' Elamite Vashti (or Mashti): see p. 303. 

royal house: lit., ‘house of the kingdom.’ The women’s | 
banquet was held in a part of the palace proper, as was perhaps 
that of the officials (ver. 3 ff.). 


to-12. Vashti refuses to appear before the guests as the ki: disipel 
10. seventh day: i.e. ofthe banquet, when the heart of the 
was merry with wine. These words are intended to account for 
the foolish request of the king. 

Mehuman, &c.: | the spelling of these seven names vate 
much in the MSS. and versions, and their etymology is very un- 
certain, as perhaps they were borne by men of several nation- 
alities. 

the seven (chamberlains): on the sacred number seven? 
see on Ezra vii. 14, and cf. ver. 14. foe 

chamberlains : render, ‘cunuchs” here and in ver, 12, ee. 
In Persia, Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, Palestine, &c., men- 
who had to wait on women or to have access to them needed to 
be eunuchs, as is the case in the modern Orient. 


' vii, 61. 





~*~ i ia ye _ 4 . “ 
eh ota ; ¢ wet Cet 
oe P 


prea ees ESTHER ag: rI-14 i! 3II 





anacied in the presence of Ahasuerus the king, 
‘to bring Vashti the queen before the king with the crown 
‘royal, to shew.the peoples and the princes her beauty: 
for she was fair to look on. But the queen Vashti 
‘refused to come at the king’s commandment by the 


» 


‘chamberlains: therefore was the king very wroth, and — 


his anger burned in him. Then the king said to the 
‘wise men, which knew the times, (for so was the king’s 
“manner toward all that knew law and judgement ; and the 
“next unto him was Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, 
_Meres, Marsena, and Memucan, the seven princes of 


~ 


that ministered: LXX ‘who were deacons,’ i.e. servants. 

_ 11. the crown (royal): the word in the M.T. (Aether) occurs 
here and in ii. 17 of what the queen wore and in vi. 8 of what was 
' placed on the king’s horse. It occurs nowhere else in the O.T. 

' Probably it is the Heb. form of the Persian hidaris, a tall, stiff, 
_ bejewelled cap worn by Persian kings on the ancient monuments 

’ The usual word for crown is fourid in viii. 15 for what Mordecai 


E wore. See Layard, Nineveh and tts Remains ©, p. 320, n. F- 
13-22. The. wise men consulted by the king advise him to put 


| Vashti away. 

a 13-15. The king consulis his wise men, showing that there was 

no law dealing with the conduct of the queen. 

_ 13. wisemen: usually explained as embracing (1) astrologers 

(see Dan. ii. 27, v.15), men ‘who knew the times,’ and (2) those 

_ who understood the principles and practice of equity (who ‘ knew 
_ Jaw and judgement’), i.e. those who sought guidance from the 
_ Supreme Mind as He revealed it in the heavenly bodies, and 

_ these who decided from their knowledge and experience of men’s 

_ way. ~ But one class only is suggested by the words and by the 
_ context, the alternate descriptions being due merely to parallel- 
ism. Those who took knowledge of the times understood the 

_ principles and customs of the law courts. 
for so, &c.: render, ‘ for so was the king’s business brought 
_ before all that knew,’ &e. 
, 14. Of the wise men mentioned in ver. 13, seven stood nearest 
the king, constituting, in fact, his privy council. 

; Garshena, &c.: the exact spelling of these seven names is 
uncertain, as the text is corrupt and MSS. and versions differ: 
_ see on ver. Io. 
seven (princes): see on Ezra vii. 14, and cf. ver. ro. 


J 


= 


= 


312, 









- Vashti Sela to tae because she hath not do 
__ bidding of the king Ahasuerus by the cham 
16 And Memucan answered before the kingand the ‘ 
Vashti the queen hath not done wrong’to the king only, 
but also to all the princes, and to all the peoples that are 
17 in all the provinces of the king Ahasuerus. For this 
deed of the queen shall come abroad unto all women, to 
make their husbands contemptible in their eyes, when it 
shall be reported, The king Ahasuerus commanded 
Vashti the queen to be brought in before him, but she. | 
18 came not. And this day shall the princesses of Persia 
and Media which have heard of the deed of the queen 
asay the like unto all the king’s princes. So shall there 


19 arise » much contempt and wrath. If it please the king, 
® Or, dell it » Or, enough ty 


~ he 





16-20. What the wise men advised. Memucan seems to be the 
spokesman for the whole body. 

' 16. Vashti had wronged the king andset a dangerous example 
to his subjects. 

17. to make, &c.: render (more literally), ‘so that it will 
make them (the women) despise their husbands in their eyes, ~ 
they (the women) say, the king,’ &c. 

husbands: the word = ‘owner,’ ‘ master,’ and well mieagbe 
connexion. It occurs also in Gen. xx. 3; Deut. xxiv. 4; Hos. ne 
Thecommon Hebrew word for husband is ish = Latin wiv,Greek. 

when... reported: the Hebrew may as in the E.VV. 


understood impersonally oras in above rendering personally: The ; 
irregularity of the suffix in the latter case will give no Hebraist 
~— the least trouble. 4 


18. say: the verb has no expressed object, but the amg 
makes it quite clear that the incident of Vashti’s refusal is in! 
to be so understood: ‘Shall... say (about this) to all,’ a a 
princes: see on ver. 3. ae 
So shall, &c.: read, making a slight change in the Heb., 
‘and whenever ( (on the part of the wife) there is contempt one ; 
~ is (on the part of the husband) wrath.’ 
= 19. If it please: see on Neh. ii. 5. 





Pra fir” ty re ea aS 


arg pW ee = : i PR eet 


ESTHER Le toa ve 8 







‘and let it Be written among the laws of: the Persians 
| and the Medes, *that it be not altered, that Vashti 
come no more before king Ahasuerus; and let the 
| king give her royal estate bunto another that j is betterthan 
| she. And when the king’s decree which he shall make 20 
Be: ‘shall be published throughout all his kingdom, (for it is~ 

| steat,) all the wives shall give to their husbands honour, __ 
“both ‘to great and small. And the saying pleased the 2r ~ 
| king and the princes; and the king did according to 
_ the word of Memucan: for he sent letters into all the PY Ys 
| King’s provinces, into every province according to 


* Heb. that it pass not away. > Heb. unto her companion, 





























mnto another: the translation is quite correct, the R.Vm. 

‘Heb. unto her companion’ being inaccurate. The same noun in 

its masc. form occurs in the idiom ‘(we must love) each the 

4 other.’ : 

3 20. great and small: i.e. men of all ranks of society. 

_ 2if. The king follows out the advice giver him. : 

4 22. letters: better ‘dispatches,’ as the former word sug- 

5 gests much that is not meant. The Heb. noun is generally trans- 

lated ‘book’ (books), see ii. 23; Neh. viii. 1, &c.; ‘books’ and - 

: a ae (letters) differed then almost exclusively in size 
only. 

Persia had in the time of Xerxes (who, according to Herodotus’, 
3 fou inded it) an excellent postal service which made use of couriers 
(Heb. ‘runners,’ see iii. 13) and horses (viii. 10). In Palestine 

end other mountainous countries the couriers (fleet footmen) were — 

" principally used, but in level countries and especially for great 

pieistanecs these couriers rode on swift horses, making journeys - 

_ off the main road on foot. In Jer. xii. 5 there isa reference to the 

quicker Movement of the horses as compared with the footmen.  —_ 

Jer. li. gx suggests that at the time implied a courier-post was all 

that existed in Babylon. It should be remembered, however, that 

the ancient Persian postal system, fully described by Herodotus ! 

paad Xenophon”, was used exclusively by the kingand the govern- 
‘ment. The poorer people had no official mode of communication. 

; province: see on ver. 7 and cf. P- 55- 

























2 Cyr. viii. 6, § 17- > 


314 






language, that once man should bear rule in 
house, and should publish it according to the 
of his people. 


2 After these things, when the wrath of king Abdou 


was pacified, he remembered Vashti, and what she had 
done, and what was decreed against her. Then said the 
SS 


writing ... language, &c: in the dispatches various 
scripts (Arabic, Aramaic, Assyrian, Hebrew, Greek—all different) 


as well as languages would have to be used. Had Xerxes i in bis 


court scribes capable of all this? Trilingual inscriptions have, 
however, been discovered in Persia. But there is reason for be- 
lieving that Aramaic was the lingua franca of the western portions 


ofthe Persian dominions at that time: ef. the recently foundAramaic 


papyri. It should be added that in parts of modern Persia and 
Russia postal arrangements are much the same as is implied in 
this book, only not so ‘ up to date!” 

every man should bear rule, &c.: woman has eel ga 
held a low place in the East, though to a less degree among 
ancient Persians. - 

and should publish: render, ‘and should speak,’ &c., the 
meaning of which appears to be that the language of the hus- 


band must be that of the home, So that his wife, if a foreigner, 


_had one? 


must learn and speak it. But it is better (with Hitzig and most 
moderns) to read ‘and should speak (=order) what he Hewes 
See on iii. r2. 

ii. 1-18. EsTHER CHOSEN QUEEN INSTEAD OF VASHTI, 
— 1-4. The king, on the advice of his courtiers resolves to seled a 


T 


successor to Vashti from virgins to be brought from all parts of his 


dominions. 
1. was pacified: Heb. ‘ had subsided’ ; so vii. ro. The pau 
=‘to sink,’ and occurs in Gen. viii. 1 (* and the waters abated’). 
‘he remembered Vashti: with remorse for what he had 
done and with renewed affection. He was evidently minded, if 
possible, to take her back. Many ways of evading this, the natural 


sense, have been proposed. The LXX inserts the negative 


(‘remembered ot’), 
2. The courtiers wished to make the king’s resolve irrevocable, 


as they had counselled the rejection of Vashti. Hence they pe : 


pound their scheme for securing another queen. 

Why did not the king forthwith raise to the now vacant queen- 
ship one of his concubines (see ver. 14) or another wife—if he 
he ie oa 


ot ae 










ESTHER 2. 3,4 315 


int Officers in all the provinces of his kingdom, that 
ey may gather together all the fair young virgins unto 
hushan the palace, to the house of the women, unto the 
stody of *Hegai the king’s chamberlain, keeper of 
he women; and let their things for purification be 


be queen instead of Vashti. And the thing pleased the 
'king ; and he did so. £ 
-* ® Heb. Hege. 


_  king’s servants: see oni. 3. 
he Officers: the Heb. noun is cognate with the verb which 
governs it (‘let the king appoint men appointed’), and in Neh. 
9 (see on) is translated ‘overseer.’. In Nehemiah the LXX 
(our ‘ bishop’), but in the present passage Zomarkhas, 
Peoaace chiefs,’ is the Greek word used. 
provinces : see on i. 1. 
virgins: this specification was more needful then, and in 
e East is still, than with us. 
_ Shushan the palace: see on i. 2 and especially on Neh. i. 2. 
house of the women: the harem or gumazkeion, situated (as 
ent excavations go to show) at the north-west of the com- 
of royal buildings. In ver. 8 it is called the ‘king’s house,’ 
in expression which in ver. 9 and iv. 1g stands for the palace 
— as a whole, though in ii. 13 and v. 1 it denotes the king’s 
aoe apartments. 
Hegai: in the Hebrew we have in this chapter two spell- 
ngs for this name, Hege and Hegai. The latter is correct. 
chamberlain : i.e. eunuch (see oni. 10). Hegai could not 
we had access to these women nor Shaashgaz to the concubines 
. 14) had they not been eunuchs. 
things for purification: lit. ‘things to rub with,’ i.e. cos- 
ics, specified inver. 12. These had to be applied for a whole 





a 
















hand (see ver. 12), as if twelve months could do more 
in twelve days or even hours towards the desired end (attrac- 
ness). 

4. and let the maiden . . . be queen: on the improbability of 
h a method of choosing a queen see Introd., p. 298. E 


a servants that ministered unto him, Let there be © 
young virgins sought for the king: and let the king 3 — 


iyen them; and let the maiden which pleaseth the king 4 


before the several candidates presented themselves for the _ 


316 








away from Jerusalem with the captives which had 





5-7- Short account of Mordecai and his cousin Esther. 1 
tion is introduced here because the story cannot go further for- 
ward without it In the Hebrew, where connexion is generally 
indicated (by ‘waw-consecutive,’ &c.), there is nothing join 
this paragraph with what precedes, suggesting that we have some- 
thing brought i in ab extra, though this conclusion is not ine x 

5. a Jew in Shushan the palace: there must have been a 
goodly number of Jews resident in the fortified part of Susa (ix. 7)_ 
as well as in the city itself (ix. 15). Some would belong to the 
army, some would be in business (for the fortress quarters must 
have contained business houses), while others would act as arti- 
sans, servants, &c. ‘The palace’ is a very inaccurate and mis- 
leading translation. "See 

Mordecai: usually explained as=‘ a devotee of the (Babylo- 
nian) god Marduk’ (=#Merodach)". This does not mean, however, 
that every man so called is what the name implies, for it was and 
is a frequent name among Jews. Every man called ‘Thomas’ is not 
a twin, nor is every one called ‘ Fisher’ what the name im 

the son of Jair, &c.: the word ben rendered ‘son’ means 
here as often (see on Ezra vii. 1) descendant, certainly in the case 
of Shimei, David's bitter foe (2 Sam. xvi. 5 ff.), and Kish the father 
of Saul es Sam. ix. 1, &c.), who are remote ancestors of Mordecai, 
as was also, perhaps, Jair. It is perhaps hinted thatasSaul con- 
quered Agag (1 Sam. xv) so his descendant Mordecai would com- 

pass the ruin of Haman the Agagite (iii. 1).. Rawlinson and many 
Sede hold that the father, grandfather, and great-grandfather are 
meant, bat the coincidence of the two latter names tells against this. 
~a Benjamite: referring, according to Hebrew 
directly to Mordecai, though for that reason applicable to the 
other names. 

S. who had been, &c. : the word can belong to Mordecai only, 
as he is the main subject of verses 5 f. But in this versethis weiter 
is guilty of an anachronism, for Jeconiah (= Jehoiachin, 2 Kings — 
xxiv. 4) and his fellow exiles were removed to Babylon in 598, ? 
115 years before the period implied in the present context. For 
the real purpose of the story, however, this error makes no differ- 
ence, though: it is an artistic flaw. No doubt, in the mind of the 
writer, this Mordecai is identical with the man of that name men- 
tioned in Ezra ii. 2 (see on) and Neh. vii. 7: so both Targums here. 
———. 


1 See p. 302+ lek ae cae Fo 








«ESTHER 2. 7,8 37 


































tried away with @ Jeconiah king of Judah, whom 
Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away. 


a 


nd he »brought up Hadassah, that is, Esther, his uncle’s 7 
iter for she had neither father nor mother, and the 
maiden was fair and beautiful ; and when her father and 
Bester’ were dead, Manders: took her for his~ own 
jughter. So it came to pass, when the king’s command- § 
nt and his decree was heard, and when many maidens 
ere gathered together unto Shushan the palace, to the 
stody of Hegai, that Esther was taken into the king’s 


_ * In 2 Kings xxiv. 6, Jehoiachin. » Heb. nourished. 


* Webuchadnezzar: more correct would be Nebuchodonnozor 
(Haupt, cf. LXX and Babylonian). The older form (Jeremiah, 
skiel) is Webuchadrezzar (see Jer. xlix. 28, &c.); see on Ezra ii. 1. 
¥. He brought up: lit. ‘he was foster- father to.’ The same 
Heb. noun occurs in Num. xi. r2 ; Isa. xlix. 23. 

_ Hadassah, thatis, Esther: the names are explained largely, 
: ‘especially by the older authors, as denoting respectively ‘ myrtle’ 
and ‘star’ (cf. Greek aster). Why in that case she received 
these names, and which of them is the original one, has been 
much disputed (see Ber.-Rys., and Paton). The latest scholars 
‘old that we have the original of Esther in the name of the Baby- 
n goddess Ishtar (cf. Ashtoreth), and that ‘Hadassah’ is 
ely a Babylonian title for this goddess: see Introd., p. 302 f. 
his uncle’s daughter: Mordecai and Esther were therefore 
cousins. The fact that they lived in such close relations—for he 
‘treated her as a daughter—has led many to think that Mordecai 
was a eunuch. If he was, this would explain the ease with which 
© gained access to the harem, and the fact that we never read of 
“his wife; it would also go well with the view that he was a palace 
official (see on ver. 21). 

_ fair: Heb. ‘ beautiful of form.’ 

beantiful: Heb. ‘good looking’; lit. ‘good. as regards 
appearance.’ 

8-11. Esther's entrance into the palace and the favourable im- 
ssion she made. , 
This verse (cf. ver. 3) takes up the thread of the narrative 
ropped for the purpose of bringing in verses 5-7. 

was taken: the Heb. verb is the regular one for marrying a 
n (Gen. iv. r9, vi. 2, &c.), and has in it no hint at the use 
pulsion, though according to both Targums and Apoc. Esther 


N > 






318 ~ ESTHER. a 

Se 
house, to the custody of Hegai, keeper of th 

9 And ve maiden pleased him, and she obtained | 


tion, ih her portions, and the seven inideien bc 
were meet to be given her, out of the king’s house: ané 
he removed her and her maidens to the best place of 
to the house of the women. Esther had not shewed her 
people nor her kindred: for Mordecai had charged her that 


wo 
wie 
as 





WL 
xiv. 15, 18, Esther had been forced against her will into the 
harem. The natural impression which the O.T. story gives is that 
the two cousins are consenting parties all through, and rejoice ex- 
ceedingly at Esther’s success when she wins the queenship. All 
this, as also the fact that she eats the food of the heathen—for her 
nationality is kept a secret—prove that the Judaism of Mordecai and 
_ Esther are of a much less stringent type than, say, that of Ezra and 
Nehemiah, who did so much to put down marriages with alias 
9. maiden : i. e. Esther. 
pleased him: i.e. more than her rivals. 
and he: i. e. the king, though he acted through his courtiers, } 
speedily (gave) : so that her year of preparation meg the 
sooner expire (see ver. 12). ae 
things for purification : see on ver. 3. « 
portions: each virgin received not only cosmetics to 
fume and beautify, but also special diet (see Dan. i. 5)s pte the 
special dieting is not mentioned in ver. 12, Esther doesnot seem — 
to have made any objection to the food, though it could not mab: 
been such as Jewish laws permitted. ff 
the (seven maidens) that each candidate had for at 
Seven maidens each is implied in the use of the definite article. _ 
meet : lit. ‘seen’; then ‘looked out,’ and so ‘selected.?” 
the king’s house: here = palace complex, as in iv. 13. 
See on ii. 3. 

10. Esther had not shewed (O.E.=reported, disclosed) ery : 
people (=nationality), nor her kindred (=family, and in par-— 
ticular her relationship to Mordecai). 

To have been known as Jewish must at the time implied, if 
not at the time of writing, have meant some disadvantages. _ 
But to have concealed these things from the king, the eunuchs, 
and her rivals required extraordinary adroitness, bu ‘if true, 
exhibit but little steadfastness of principle on the part of or 
her cousin. See on verses 8f, and onvi. 10, ates a? 


‘ a rs Pe 
i’ ones aes < 











bdr. z er 


3 ESTHER 21-13 ee 





























; before the court of the women’s house, to know how 


hasterus, after that it had been done to her according 
the law for the women, twelve months, (for so were 
e days of their purifications accomplished, /o we¢, six 
onths with oil of myrrh, and six months with sweet 
ours, and with the things for the purifying of the 
men, ) then in this wise came the maiden unto the king, 





1. walked: Heb. ‘used to walk.’ 

before: i.e. on the eastern side of the court: see on Neh. 
gi. Perhaps at the time of the rising of the sun each day the 
tes of the palace, male and female, would congregate for 
rpose of worship on the sunrise side of the royal buildings. The 
© cousins might thus easily meet daily, though silently recoiling 
m the sun-worship around. Mordecai’s anxiety to learn of the 
ite and prospects of his cousin must have been great. One must 
t imagine that among the Persians in those days the relations 
tween the sexes was so strictly guarded as in the modern 
Orient. 


-15. How the king made the selection. 

The candidates passed in turns (how the order was settled we 

ot know) night by night into the king’s room, just as was 

by the wives of Pseudo-Smerdis!, with which and with the 

present narrative compare the Introduction to the Arabian Nights, 
tale of Shahriar ®. 

‘twelve months: as ifa year’s perfuming, &c., could effect 

e for the beautifying of the virgins than say that of twelve 

urs} 

' myrrh: Heb. mdr, the same word. 

sweet odours: Heb. bosem (in the plural), i.e. ‘ balsam’ (wit 

tted ‘1’), 

- and (with the things) = ‘even,’ the words that follow merely 

ming up the cosmetics aforementioned. 

* ver. 13 joins on to the beginning of ver. 12, repeated here after 

terruption following 12°. Render, ‘12 Now whenever the 

f each girl was to go in to the king, &c. 13 Even (when) 

(her turn) the girl came to the king, whatever she used to 


Herod. ili. 60. 2 See Additional Notes, p. 363- 
Y 


LOGO tke 


sther did, and what should become of her: Now 
the turn of every maiden was come to goin to king ~ 


12 


= 
& 


z 


1e sh ould sot shew. it. “And Mordecai Valked every Ir 


7 ah Tebeth, in the seventh year of his reign. And the 


_ Shaashgaz, 


15 name. Now when the turn of pene the daus 


16 upon her. So Esther was taken unto king Ahasuerus in 


of the women and that of the king. See on ver. 3 and on v. CAS _ 


the O.T. 




























the king’s chamberlain, which ke 
concubines: she came in unto the king no mot 
the king delighted in her, and that she were | 


required souined but what Hegai the king’s cham cs : 
the keeper of the women, appointed. And Est 
obtained favour in the sight of all them that look 


his house royal in the tenth month, which is the month 








demand (cosmetics, jewellery, &c.) it was the custom to give | 
to take (lit. enter) with her out of,’ &c. Each girl was -helpe 
in every way to make herself as winsome as she could. oa 

Note in ver. 13 the explicit differentiation between the house 


14. On the morning each candidate had to leave the 
room and to pass into the concubines’ department, not rep 
her visit to the king unless specially requested, In the 
Nights’ tale each maid had to be killed in the morning: : 
Shaashgaz: Haupt says we should read ‘ Shashegaz,’ 
chamberlain: render ‘eunuch’: see on ver. 3 and 

15. Esther’s personal charms were so great, and she’ 
conscious of them {or was it her modesty ?) that she desi 
special aid to recommend her to the king. r 
Abihail: in LXX here andix, 29 Aminadab (= Abinadsb) 
16-18. Esther chosen as queen. 
16. was taken: i.e. as wife (so Targ.©): see on ver. . 
his house royal: lit. ‘ the house of his kingdom’= 

of the king in ver. 13. = 
the tenth month : i.e. Dec.-Jan.: see on Ezta x. 16. 
Tebeth: a Babylonian name, nowhere else menti 





in the seventh year: i.e. in 478, four years a 


oF —*  S . Saae a 
— M 4 -—- oa % 


sy eres e 2, 18, ig) oe ts ee 


































loved ater shove all the women; and she obtained 
race and favour in his sight more than all the virgins ; 
0 that he set the royal crown upon her head, and made 


eat feast unto all his princes and his servants, even_ 
her’s feast ; and he made a * release to the provinces, 
and gave gifts, according to the » bounty of the king. 
And when the virgins were gathered together the second 19 
® Heb. rest. > Heb. hand. 


leposition (i. 3). It was during this period that Xerxes'con- — 
“ducted his ill-starred expedition into Greece, the battle of Salamis 
taking place in 480. Some ascribe the delay in making the selec- 
‘tion to this expedition. The writer, however, viewing those 
‘years in the distance, sees nothing going on in Susa but this con- 
tinual testing of virgins. We must remember that we are reading 
romance and not strict history. 

| 17%. above all the women: i.e. above the concubines (and 
Wives ?) already in the harem and the virgins who were Esther’s 


crown : see oni. 52. 
~— 28. a great feast: Josephus says ‘a wedding feast.’ Great 
events were celebrated and distinguished persons honoured by 
‘banquets then as now. 
release: Heb., ‘a causing to rest’ (the root in the Heb. for 
ah), but from what ? Probably from prison (see I Mace. x. 33; 
. ¥XVii. 15), not from taxes (1 Macc. x. 29), which in Persia 
re unknown, nor from military service (as LXX, Targ.@ 
ume). 
Ea: the Bicrew 3 is singular, though it may beara es 
e. The-same word in Jer. xl. 5 is translated ‘present’; in 
OS y. 11 it means ‘tribute,’ which may be its sense here, ‘ he 
ave (back) the tribute,’ though Persian custom is against this. 

- bounty : see on i. 7. 


9-23. Mordecai exposes a plot to take the king's life. 

19. Render, ‘And when the virgins were being gathered 
gether, then Mordecai,’ &c., referring back to ver. 8. 

the second time: omit. The one Hebrew word so trans- 
ed was inserted from a view of the passage which assumed 
| another assembly of girls took place in addition to that 
en of in verses 8ff. We have, however, in verses 19-23 an 
pisode which took place while the virgins were being brought 
| (verses 8 ff.). spent omits the verse on account of its difficulty, 


at - 


vi 
i .. 
¥e 





er queen instead of Vashti. Then the king made a 18 


322 - ESTHER 2. 20—7 





not yet shewed her kindred nor eee M 

had charged her: for Esther did the commandment of 

Mordecai, like as when she was brought up with him. 
sat In those days, while Mordecai sat in the king’s gate, two 

of the king’s chamberlains, Bigthan and Teresh, of those 

which kept the *door, were wroth, and sought to lay hands © 
22 on the king Ahasuerus. And the thing was khown to 

Mordecai, who shewed it unto Esther the queen ; and 
23 Esther told the king ¢heveof in Mordecai’s name. And 

® Heb. threshold. 


ee 
and if the words ‘ the second time’ are kept, Haupt’s sug eaae 
is the only possible one. 

the king’s gate: a favourite resort of Mordecai’s (see ver. 21, 
&c.). It stood probably at the entrance to the palace g 
and, like city gates in the East commonly, it was a place 
public resort and perhaps the place where justice was adminis- 
tered. Some infer, from the fact that Mordecai is often mentioned 
in connexion with it, that he was a government official (see on 
ver. 7and cf. vi. 10). 

20. Esther had not yet, &c.: a more literal rendering would 
be, ‘Esther was not one that declared,’ &c., i. e. during these 
proceedingsshe used to keep silent about, &e. 

shewed ., . kindred: see on ver. Ifo. 

21. In those days: i.e, while the girls were being brought 

(verses 8 ff. and 19). 

chamberlains: render, ‘ eunuchs’: see on i. ae 

Bigthan: called in i. 10 ‘ Bigtha’ and in vi. 2 ‘ Bigthana’ — 

door: Heb. ‘threshold.’ These two men had apparently 
charge of the king’s sleeping-room, and could easily compass his 
death. According to both Targs., the plan hit upon was to put 
a venomous reptile in the king’s cup when he was about to drink. 
As a matter of fact, this Xerxes lost his life in 465 through a con- — 
spiracy of the kind, as did also Artaxerxes III (Ochus) in 338. ~ 

were wroth: why? ? -No one knows, though the Targumists, 
commentators, &c., offer innumerable explanations: see Berth., — 
Ryss., and Paton. % 

to lay hands on: i.e. to put to death: so iii, 6, ix. red ets 

22. was known: better, ‘came to be known.’ "How? We 
are not told, though here again many surmises have been offered. 

shewed: see on Ver. Io. 
in Mordecai’s name: if the queen mentioned her cousin's 


~~ © 


foe meee 





a ges ESTHER 2. 23—3. 1 ss 323 


“when inquisition was made of the matter, and it was 
- found to be so, they were both hanged on a tree: and it 
"was written in the book of the chronicles before the 
_ king. 

__ After these things did king Ahasuerus promote Haman 3 





name when disclosing the affair to the king—and the words can 
mean nothing else—how could the king have so soon forgotten all 
- about it, especially as Persian kings were proverbial for the way 
_ in which they rewarded outstanding merit among their soldiers ? 
_ 28. hanged: better ‘impaled’ (so Streane, Haupt, &c.), this 
_ being the mode of capital punishment prevalent in Persia at the 
" time’: cf.‘ona tree’ ; see on Ezra vi. 11. Death by hanging or 
' Strangulation is but twice mentioned in the Bible, and in both 
tases as a mode of suicide: see 2 Sam. xvii. 23 and Matt. xxvii. 5 ; 
f ef. Nahum ii. 13, where the same Hebrew verb occurs as in the 
7 former passage. According to Joseph:, Jero., and perhaps the 
_ Syr., ‘ crucified ’ is the proper translation, but this was the Roman 
mode of capital punishment. Paton defends the ordinary render- 
_ ing hanged, relying chiefly on v. 14 (see on). But up to the 
' present (1909) no example has been seen on the ancient monu- 
ments of Babylon, Assyria, or Persia, of hanging by the neck or 
of fastening to a cross. 
the book of the chronicles: the Hebrew name for the 
- canonical ‘ Books of Chronicles,’ though of course the latter books 
' are not here meant. The Hebrew means literally ‘the book of 
' daily acts,’ i.e. ‘the diary.’ Such annals were preserved by 
‘the kings of Persia?, of Assyria, Babylonia, and also* of Israel. 
_ Herod. says that the Persian kings in such records preserved the 
names of men who deserved special honour *. This book is referred 
_ to by a longer name in vi. rf. See Mal. iii. 16; cf. Isa. iv. gr; 
Ezek. xiii. 9; Phil. iv. 3, &c.; and on Ps. cxxxix. 16 (Century 
_ Bible). 
iii, T-iy. 17. Haman’s Promotion To BE GRAND VIZIER AND HIS 
PLoT TO DESTROY THE JEWS. 
6, Mordecai refusing to bow before the new prime minister, the 
latier formed a design to destroy the Jews. 
1. After these things: an indefinite statement, implying some 
time between 478 (ii. 16) and 473 (ver. 7). 


» + See Herod. iii. 159, iv- 43; Layard, Nin. and Bab., p. 355 n. 
The latter says this mode of punishment obtained in Turkey in his 

own time. 
2 Ezra iv. 15 (see on), Her. vii. 100, &e. 


$1 Kings xiv. 19, &c. 4 


Vili. 25- 


- king had so commanded concerning him. But M 
_ 3 bowed not down, nor did him reverence. Then th 


acts of respect ‘and submissiveness for the chief minister 


324 






eS bowed down, and did reverence to Hanae 









Haman: originally, according to Jensen, the name of 
Elamite deity (Humman or Humban): see Introd., P 309, and 
Ber.-Rys., Paton. meta 
Hantmedatha: a compound (Jensen thinks) of anatt and » 
a verb: perhaps = ‘a gift of Haman’ (=*Humman’): ef f. 
‘Theodore’ and ‘ Nathaniel.’ Boye 
the Agagite: i.e. probably a ‘descendant of Agag (ea 
xv), and therefore an Amalekite: see on ii, 5. It is stre 
though perhaps where nationalites were so mixed not impossible, ~ 
that an Amalekite should have been Persia’s prime minister. In 
Great Britain a Jew (Disraeli) was prime minister not very long — 
ago. There are many other explanations of ‘Agagite’: see 
Ber.-Rys., and Paton. wie 
set his seat: render, ‘ gave him a position.’ The word — 
rendered ‘ seat’ (hissé) means ‘seat,’ then ‘throne’ (see on i. ta), | 
and then, as here, ‘position.’ x 
above all, &c.: i.e. he made him Grand Vizier, who had- 
immeasurably greater power than our prime minister. we. 
2. the king’s servants: see on i. 3. oe 
bowed down ( = fell on theirknees) and did reverence =( 
trated themselves) in the true Oriental fashion before ee ; 
and in the manner of modern Mohammedans during prayer, 


2°_6, Mordecai refuses to join the multitude in bending, &c., before 


Haman. Haman’s anger and scheme of revenge. What objection 
could Mordecai, though a Jew (ver. 4), have to performing the — 
















other subjects performed, and which accord with the ways of 
Orientals to-day? The commentators (Rawlinson, &c.), Jewish 
and Christian, say it_was Divine homage that Haman demanded. 
Probably, however, the writer brought in this incident as a literary 
necessity. It was needful in some way to explain the rivalry and ~ 
ill-feeling between Mordecai and Haman, and to make Mordecai 
deny to the new prime minister the usual homage, pews. 
implied cause, seemed a fit means towards thisend. 

the king had so commanded: in ordinary cases no such 
command was necessary. Perhaps Haman had risen from alow 
family, and a special command was needed to secure the r r 
nition ordinarily shown to holders of the office. vie 




























im, and he hearkened not unto them, that they told — 
man, to see whether Mordecai’s * matters would stand: 


man saw that Mordecai bowed not down, nor did him - 
‘Teyerence, then- was Haman full of wrath. But he6 
“thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone ; for they= 


id shewed him the people of Mordecai: wherefore 
“Haman sought to destroy all the Jews that were through- 
out che whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, even the people 

pf Mordecai. In the first month, which is the month 7 
-* Or, words 


_8. the king’s gate: see on ii. I9. 

4, matters: perhaps this is a plural of intensity, ‘ great affair? _ 
= ‘strange conduct.’ The R.Vm. ‘ words’ may be safely ignored, 
‘though the Hebrew allows it. ss 
_ . (whether Mordecai’s matters) would stand: better ‘could 


ach conduct. 

6. he thought scorn, &c.: Wildeboer (followed by Kent and 
-aton ) well expresses the sense of the Hebrew, ‘held it beneath 
is dignity to,’ &c. 


Z o many Oriental parallels to this projected butchery of the Jews, 
s the great massacre of the Magi (Magophonia) at the accession _ 
‘Darius I, and the slaughter of the Scy thians about a century 
ier. One may refer to the butchery of whole hordes of Jews 
in quite recent times in Russia and elsewhere. If, however, 
‘Haman or any other prime minister had schemed a wholesale 
cre of Jews he would have set about it at once. But it 
S necessary for the dénouement of the tale that Mordecai and 


an’s project, and that could be secured by introducing the ~ 
cident about the lot, though the writer could not have had — 
ach faith in such things. The delay was literally ‘allotted. — 


11. The king agrees to Haman’s proposal and promises help 
realizing it. 
7. the first month . .. Nisan: see on Ezra x. 9, 17. = 


~ 


t ; Now it came to pass, when they spake daily unto 4 


he had told them that he was a Jew. And whens — 


d,’ i.e. judicial examination, whether or not the law allowed ~ — 


_ sought to destroy, &c. : Rawlinson and others have pointed ~ 


sther should have time and opportunity for the overthrow of — 





the twelfth year, &c, : i. e. in 473. 

they (cast Pur, &c.): who? In ewes the mS 
singular, and some make Haman the subject. It ‘is, however, however, 
probably a case of the impersonal construction so O ins 
Hebrew (‘one cast,’ &c.=‘ Pur... was cast’): see p. Pi 

Pur: whatever the etymology of the word (see In 
pp. 301 ff.), the writer takes it to mean ‘lot,’ which eal one need 
to know in order to follow the thread of the we 

the lot: better ‘lots.’ In Hebrew the singular is consid | 
used for the plural ; it indicates the thing meant. Or we ave 
perhaps the generic ‘article ; ; ef. ‘the lion.’ =| 

Divination by lot (arrows, strips of wood, or bits ar 


a 


pebbles, &c.) was very widespread in ancient times,' prevails 
among people of low culture, and is not dead even in Great 
Britain among professedly Christian people. og 

For what purpose was the present lot taken? Almost cartels : 
to find out a lucky day for the horrid deed which Haman ee 
mind: so nearly all commentators. Paton, however, argues that 
the object was to ascertain .a lucky day on which to lay the pro- 
ject before the king, and he refers to the fact that, as soon as 
a day had been pronounced lucky, Haman went in ‘to the king 
(ver. 8). But Haman wished to present himself with the Sean 
of the lot not only as to the day, but also as to the feasibility of ~ 
the fact itself. To fix upon a day for the slaughter carried with it 4 
approval of the slaughter itself. Besides the day settled by lot ~ 
(see on ver. 7) was also that for the massacre (see ver. 13 and ef, 4 
ix. 18 f.). 

How was the lot taken? Probably as follows: There would 
be twelve lots, marked 1 to 12, put into a box; whichever of 
these was taken out was to decide the month, in the | 
case the twelfth month (Adar). Then there would be thirty 
marked 1 to 30, put into the same or a larger box; whichever was 
taken out was to decide the day, in the present case the thirteenth 
day (see ver. 13). 

The words ‘from day to day and from month to rabmth © refer } 
merely to the succession of numbers indicating months and 
Paton holds that on every month and day from the first inv se 
(ver. 7) the lot was taken afresh to know if the day in ion 
was the one for visiting the king. In that case they were 
lots for some eleven months! 














1 See Magic, Divination, and Demonology among the Hebrews. 
and Related Peoples, by the present writer, p. 75, &e. 


te 


- oe Fite a) ee 
2 an oa ie ia 
¢ 


ESTHER eu rh Ee 











from month to aoa fo the twelfth ondl which i is coe i 
onth Adar. And ‘Haman said unto king Ahasuerus, go" 


and their laws are diverse from //ose of every people; 
neither keep they the king’s laws: therefore it is not bfor 
he king’s profit to suffer them. If it please the king, 9 
‘let it be written that they be. destroyed: and I will 
“pay ten thousand talents of silver into the hands of those 

. * Or, separated > Or, meet for the king 





fo the twelfth month... Adar: read and render (with 
LXX, Old Lat., and virtually all modern scholars), ‘ And the lot fell 
for the 13th (LXX 14th) of the month, Adar.’ The mistake in 
the LXX (14th day).may be due to the influence of i ix; 19. ues 
M. .T. gives no sense. : 
' Adar: see on Ezra vi. 15 and x.9. Paton is wrong when 
he says that Adar is mentioned only in Esther. 
8. scattered abroad : living among people of all nationalities, 
dispersed: render, as in the R.Vm., ‘separated’: they 
keep apart, do not eat with or as others, will not intermarry, &e, 
The description applies to the Jews of to- day. When due to 
‘religious principles the separateness of the Jew is to his credit 
‘rather than the reverse. No people on the face of the earth have 
paid or pay more dearly for their religion than the Jews. 
their laws are diverse: i.e. their religious laws. 

_ neither keep they the king’s laws: i.e. when opposed to 
; their religion. The same-could be said of Christian martyrs. : 
not for the king’s profit: probably better than the R.Vm. 
he verb occurs in v. 13 (‘is not enough for me’), vil. 4 (end) 
‘not have compensated,’ see on), and is restored (?) in i. 22 (see 

: last note on). 

9. Tf it please the king: see on Neh. ii. 5. 

" written: i.e. written down as a decree. 

‘Iwill pay, &c.: evidently out of his own pocket, not out of the 
proceeds of the Jewish massacre. There is no condition attached. 
' ten thousand talents of silver: about £3,360,000 (see on 
bpara. Vili. 26), rather more than two-thirds of the annual revenue 
‘of the Persian empire. Rawlinson calls attention to Pythius, 
who offered this same king (not Darius, as Paton says) a gift of 
“money equal to about 4} millions’ sterling'—a sum regarded, 
however, by Grote as fabulous and false. But the requirements of 


v 


Rot 
= 


Clie SR as ee ahs 

















i 4 j - 1 Her. vii. 28. 
ore ‘i 


fi 








328 ESTHER 8, 10-12 ay pein : ; 
that have the charge of the kings business, to bring it 
10 into the king’s treasuries. And the king took hia rig 
from his hand, and gave it unto Haman, the son of | 
11 Hammedatha the Agagite, the Jews’ enemy. And the 
king said unto Haman, The silver is given to thee, 
the people also, to do with them as it seemeth good to 


12 thee. Then were the king’s * scribes called in‘ the first 


month, on the thirteenth day thereof, and there was 
written according to all that Haman commanded unto the 


King’ s satraps, and to the governors that were over every 
® Or, secretaries 








the story and what it is intended to teach do not necessitate our 
taking these details quite seriously. Ndéldeke thinks that this 
exact sum has been made up by a process of Rabbinical caleula- 
tion: see E.B. ii. 1401, and Targ. ® here and on iv. f, 

those that have charge of the king’s business : i. €. those 
who had charge of the revenues: see ix. 3 and cf- 2 Kings xii, 1 
and Neh. xi. 16, 22, &c. 

10. ring: better ‘signet ring. Signatures are still made in 
the East by seals, not by pens. By handing over to Haman his 
seal he gave him the right of signing documents and of thus 
enforcing his own authority in the name of the king (see viii. 2, 8; 
Gen. xli. 42; 1 Macc. vi. 15). The seal was sometimes suspended 
from the neck by a cord and sometimes attached to’a cylindrical 
framework held in the hand. 

the Jews’ enemy: to be an Agagite meant this: see on 
vii. 6. 

11. The king promises men and money for the gruesome a ip 
It is strange, if true, that Xerxes should consent to help in 
butchering his Jewish subjects, including those in Palestine } 

12-15. The decree sent forth throughout the king's dominions. 

12. scribes: they must have been very numerous or very 
learned to be able to write in the script and language of each © 
nationality embraced in the Persian empire of the es, see on 
i. 22. 1 

They began their work on the thirteenth day of the fi ‘ { 
(Nisan), just eleven months before the massacre was 0} to. 
take place (ver. 13). For this long interval see on ver. 6. 

satraps: the heads of the twenty Persian provinces: see on 
i, 1 and on Ezra viii. 36. 

governors: heads of sub-satrapies, such as Zerubbabel and 
Nehemiah of Judah: see om i. t and on-Ezra Viii. 36. ‘ 


“a es Rims 





































ee ESTHER 3%, 1% 33 


in ce, and to the princes of every people ; to every pro-- ie 
ince according to the writing thereof, and to every — 
ple after their language ; in the name of king Aha- 

rus was it written, and it was sealed with the king’s 

- And letters were sent by posts into all the king’s pro- 13 
‘vinces, to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish, all 
“Jews, both young and old, little children and women, in 
jone day, even upon the ‘thirteenth day of the twelfth 
month, which is the month Adar, and to take the spoil 

of them for a prey. A copy of the writing, * that the 14 
decree should be given out in every province, was 


published unto all the peoples, that they should be ready 
i 2 Or, fo be given out for a decree 


princes : see on Ezra ix. 1. 

43. posts: Heb. ‘runners,’ a sense surviving in ‘ post-haste’: 
cf. Job ix. 25, ‘ my days are swifter than a fost.’ From denoting 
' the fixed positions between which couriers conveyed letters, &c., 
qt came to be used for the couriers themselves. In the present 
"case horses do not seem to have been used, as speed was nO 
‘object. Contrast what is said in viii ro. See oni. 22. 

” to destroy, &c. > note the aggregation of synonyms common 


_ document as was ever penned. Init the Jews are spoken of as ~ 


peoples ; they set at defiance the king’s authorities, are all men’s 
ses, and work mischief of every kind. Wherefore it is they, 
cir wives and children, must be consigned to Hades.”] 2 
14. copy: see on Ezra iv. 11, where the same Persian word is ~ 
ed with the difference of one letter (¢ for 7). Probably we 
ould render, ‘a copy of (a part of) the writing; let the decree 
. given out in every province and let it be published to all the 
I > &c. The words ‘copy of the writing’ introduce the 

, words of the official letter to Artaxerxes in Ezra iv. 14 
_ (See on). 


eee. ~ 
4 -* 


- 





that day: the thirteenth of Adar (see ver. 1g). ey aes 
15. While the couriers hurried to make the pricking 

the provinces the decree was publicly announced in the fortress 
of Susa, Note the contrast : the king and his minister were 
to their wine (or to a banquet, Paton) as unconcerned over 
impending massacre of Jews as Nero was chanting the ‘Fall of 
Troy’ and admiring the beautiful (sic) sight of Rome ablaze ; on — 
the other hand, the city (or at least the Jewish element in at ‘was 
perplexed ! See on viii, 15. Reo 


eats 


IV-VII Ce 


TuHRouGH THE INTERVENTION OF ESTHER THE THREATENED 
SLAUGHTER OF JEWS IS AVERTED AND HAMAN IMPALED ON 
THE TREE PREPARED BY HIS INSTRUCTIONS FOR MORDECAL 


1-3. Great lamentation of Mordecai and other Jews, ‘ eee 
knew: better ‘ got to know.’ How? See oni, 22. 22 ' 
all that was done: including the part played by Bae: ) 

see ver. 7. 
rent his clothes (see on Ezra ix. 3), amd put on sackoloek : 
with ashes (see Dan. ix. 3; Jonah iii. 6), each act an expression of — 
grief; the coming together of all indicates intense grief. = — 
sackcloth: a coarse dark cloth made from the hair of goats 
and camels. ‘Haircloth’ would be a better rendering. The | 
Hebrew word is sack (whence ‘ sackcloth’), but its deriesaaae 
meaning are very uncertain. 
with ashes: the construction is that called a zevigma; the 
reader having to supply the appropriate verb. The Hebrew has 
simply ‘ put on haircloth and ashes,’ i.e. ‘ and strewed ee 
the head).’ The. versions supply the verb understood, but 
Hebrew does not require it, 
These expressions of grief are explained (by Schwally), as | 
survivals of the cult of the dead. SeOV a 
2. even before: better (as Hebrew) ‘as far as before.’ ont ci 


Saas 








ESTHER 4. 3-6 ee 331 





clothed with sackcloth. And in every province, whither- 3 _ 
“soeyer the king’s. commandment and his decree came, 
there was great mourning among the Jews, and fasting, 
cand weeping, and wailing ; and®many lay in sackcloth and 
ashes. And Esther’s maidens and her chamberlains 4 
came and told it her; and the queen was exceedingly 
“grieved: and she sent raiment to clothe Mordecai, and 
Bto take his sackcloth from off him: but he received it 
‘not. Then called Esther for Hathach, one of the king’s 5 
‘chamberlains, whom he had appointed to attend upon 
her, and charged him to go to Mordecai, to know what 
. was, and why it was. So Hathach went forth to 6 
® Heb. sackcloth and ashes were spread under many. 


x 
i 





3 _ for none might, &c.: because used as a sign of mourning 
during a death, the haircloth came to be regarded as unclean, as 
"was everything connected in any way with a dead body. 
the king’s gate: see on ii. Ig. = 
- 3. great mourning: the acts mentioned were probably 
“religious ones—confession, prayer, &c. 
a fasting: this has bulked largely in the religions of the 
“ancient world, especially among the Chinese, Hindus, and 
' Persians ; to a less degree among the Semites, and still less did 
it prevail among the classical nations. Inthe O. T. it is invariably 
“the accompaniment of prayer, and in ver. 16 (see on) the fasting 
“spoken of really includes prayer. 
hi many: Heb. ‘ the many,’ which, as in Greek =‘ the majority,” ~ 
‘most.’ 
lay in sack (=hair) cloth, &c.: the sense is ‘lay on a hair- 
cloth strewn with ashes.’ 
4-9. Esther ascertains the cause of Mordecat’s grief. 
| 4. maidens... chamberlains (=eunuchs) : an Oriental queen 
“would be sure to have maidens (see on ii. 9) and eunuchs (see on 
i. 10) to wait on her. 
F she sent raiment, &c., to enable Mordecai to enter the 
“place that he might explain matters : see on ver. 2. 
> 5. Hathach: LXX Azharthaion ; Targ.™, Talm., ‘ Daniel.’ 
chamberlains : see on i. ro. ‘ 
what this was, &c.: what the haircloth, &c., meant—a sign 
‘of mourning, and what was the cause of the mourning. 
















Mordeent: unto the broad place 
7 before the king’s gate. And Mordecai 
that had happened unto him, and the exac 
money that Haman had promised to pay to 
8 treasuries for the Jews, to destroy them, Als 
“him the copy of the writing of the decree is 


and to declare it unto her ; and to charge her 
- should go in ‘unto the king, to make supplicat 


ro decai. Then Esther spake unto Hathach, and ga 
Ir a message unto Mordecai, saying: All the king’s se 


6. broad place: see on Ezra x. 9. ‘ : See, 
the king’s gate: see on ii. I9. a i : 
7. the exact sum, &c.: see on iii. g and on Neh, vii oy 
(‘exactly’). The Heb. noun here used oceurs besides only. in 
xX. 2. e 
8. the (better ade $03 copy (see on iii. 14)... given ie 


Shushan (see iii. 15): it is probable that the king had a go 
number of copies prepared to be exhibited at important ) 
and shown to important personages. But of course 1g, 
typing, and modern methods of copying were unknown in those 
far-off days. Had men then some method of caultiplyeae the 
than the drudgery of writing separate copies ? ws 
the (copy): the Hebrew can, and here does, mea Ba, 
though the absence of the article in Hebrew is no proof in itself 
that the noun (‘copy’) is indefinite, for in Semitic, as eee 
a noun, though definite, drops its article before a genitive. — my 


10-12. Esther's first answer: she could do nothing. ey Sag he 
11. No one was allowed to enter the king’s mner nent: 
unbidden. Esther therefore could not present herself ae 
king. Herodotus’, however, says that any subject could 
to the royal presence if he previously announced 
not an objectionable personage. Either the writer = ei 


iii. 118, 140. pea ia os 


















1 
































ato the inner. court, who is not called, eas is one 
w for him, that he be put to death, except such to whom 
1¢ king shall hold out the golden sceptre, that he may 
+ but I have not been called to come in unto the 
ing these thirty days. And they told to Mordecai 
sther’s words. Then Mordecai bade them return answer 
unto Esther, Think not with thyself that thou shalt 
cape in the king’s house, more than all the Jews. 
lor if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, 
hen shall relief and deliverance arise to the Jews from 
nother place, but thou and thy father’s house shall 





eourt etiquette in the time of Xerxes or he intentionally sacrifices 
"accuracy to the desire of magnifying Esther’s courage in visiting 
the king notwithstanding the danger involved. 


the king could be seen on his throne (see v. I). 

the golden sceptre: see v.2. As represented on the monu- 
> ments, it resembled a Jong tapering rod with a headlike ornament 
"at one end and a loop at the other. Xenophon says that three 
"hundred sceptre-bearers attended the elder Cyrus. 

; days: had Esther’s place in the king’s affections 
; Sheen taken by another? v. 2 suggests a negative answer, 

(and) they (told): read (with the versions), ‘he’ (ie, 
Hathach). 

’ 13f. Mordecai’s remonstrance. If the royal edict is executed 
“neither Esther nor her father’s house (Mordecai) will be able to 
a 

13. aa not with thyself: lit. ‘imagine not in thy soul * 


=(=seif) 


ue 3- 
14. relief: lit. ‘breadth,’ ‘spaciousness.’ Among the Semites 
‘and also in Persian, Sanat; &c., a state of comfort is conceived 
as one of ‘ roominess’ ; the contrary state as one of ‘straitness.’ 
The Hebrew verb rendered ‘to deliver,’ which is cognate to 
x ‘Joshua’ and ‘Jesus,’ means literally ‘ set at large!’ 
_ from another place: i.e. from God: see Jer. xxxi. 35-37. 


ie iy 


king’s house: here the palace complex, as in li. 9 ;.see on 





eos 1 See Brief Studies in Psalm Criticism, by the present writer in 
Orientalische Studien (N6ldeke Memorial), vol. ii. 648 f. 


ree ae ESTHER fy 333 a 


“Mner court: cf. ‘the outer court,’ vi.4. From the former 


The Divine name is, however, carefully avoided. Thetwo Targs., _ 


16 them return answer unto Mordecai tor gat 


17 law: and if I perish, I perish. So Mordecai 1 


_, law by fasting during the Passover (Nisan 14), when Gis: 










all the Jews that are present in Shushan, and ye fc 
_me, and neither eat nor drink three days, night rd: 
I also and my maidens will fast in like manner; an 
will I go in unto the king, which is not according 


manded him. 


Joseph., and Lat. insert ‘God.’ Perhaps, however (so Si 
“the writer has in mind deliverance from another nation 
See 1 Macc. viii. 17, xii. 1. 
for such a time as this: i.e. to deliver. 
15 f, Esther's second reply : she will stake all for her is 
16. the Jews that are present: see oni. 5, in the to 
that the Jews at Susa could put to death three pondved) men (see 
ix. 15) it may be inferred that their number was not incon- 
siderable. Be 
fast (=pray) ye for me: see on ver. 3 (fasting). These 7 
» ‘prayer’ seems studiously avoided, tliough the thing is implied, 
‘because the former—the word—would too obviously suggest ) 
God : see on ver. 13 (another place), Rte 
three days: parts only of three days (i.e, some thi y-six 
hours) may be intended: see Matt. xii. go; ef. xxviii. 1. ft we 
assume this, the force of what the older commentators 
Esther trusted in God, not in her beauty, or she waeitee 
endanger the latter by long fasting—is (as Wild., &e. s a) 
diminished. “a0 
if I perish, I perish =‘ what must be must be’: “see. Gen. ’ 
xliii. 14 for a parallel expression. 
17. Mordecai assents to Esther's request. 
went (his way): the Hebrew verb (cognate with “by ‘ 
= Hebrew, ‘one that has crossed | ‘the Jordan or the Euphrates)),_ 
means primarily ‘to cross,’ ‘pass over’; then ‘to t ; 
and then, ‘as Gen. xviii. 5, and here (perhaps also in Neh. ii, 14, 
see on) it=‘to depart’ (i. e. to pass over the distance before one). ~ 
Jewish expositors, however (the Targs., &¢.), explain ‘the verb: 
as=‘to transgress,’ understanding that Mordecai tran 













be Bey. rejoicing. ee did he fast during ripen 


ESTHER 5. 1-3 335° . = 2 





br Slow it came to pass on the third day, that Esther put 5 
on her royal apparel, and stood in the inner court of the 
king's house, over against the king’s house : and the king 
= upon his royal throne in the royal house, over against » 
‘the entrance of the house. And it was so, when the king 2 
saws Esther the queen standing in the court, that she 
obtained favour in his sight: and the king held out to © 
Esther the golden sceptre that was in hishand. So Esther 
drew near, and touched the top of the sceptre. Then 3 
‘said the king unto her, What wilt thou, queen Esther? 


Sopayer, In these prayers the Divine names ‘ Lord,’ ‘ God,’ ‘God | 

of Abraham,’ ‘ King of the Gods,’ &c., occur with more frequency 

than is the case in other books, suggesting, what other con- 

‘siderations make practically certain—that the purpose of the 

be additions is to make some amends for the absence of 
e eo element in the canonical parts of the book.} 


~ eg 


ore 


Vv 


apf TD he ae receives Esther. 

1. on the third day: i.e. since the fasting began (iv. 16: see 
on). ‘This shows that the fasting did not last three days. 
creas) put on her royal apparel: this rendering assumes the 
insertion of a word (=apparel) found in the versions but lost in 
‘the M.T. 


stood: better, ‘came to a stand.’ The Hebrew expression 
q 
i 





veally =" entered and stopped’: see Joshua x. 17; Judges ix. 33. 
' inner court: sce on iv. 11.. In this court was situated the 

brcnce to the pillared hall at the opposite end of which sat the -— 

_king on his throne. As the queen entered: the inner court the 

king could probably sce her through the doorway. 

_ King’s house: the king’s private apartments; See on ii. g. 

Dieulafoy, the distinguished French explorer of Susa, says that 

here the throne-room is alone meant. i : 

over against has reference to Esther. : 

2 2. held out... the golden sceptre = see on iv. II. 

touched : Vulg. ‘ kissed.’ 















es 3-8. The queen, encouraged by the king, wiakes two requests : that 
‘the ae should accept invitations to dine with her on two separate 
“occasions. 

“ ce the king has offered much more than that, why does not 





Lk eee Te ate 





the king, let the kin and Haman come this ps 
5 banquet that I have prepared for him. Then the king 
said, Cause Haman to make haste, that it may ‘be done 
as Esther hath said. So the king and Haman’ came to 
6 the banquet that Esther had prepared. And the king 
said unto Esther at the banquet of wine, What is thy | 
petition? and it shall be granted thee: and what is 
thy request? even to the half of the kingdom it shall be | 
7 performed. Then answered Esther, and said, My petition 
8 and my request is ; if I have found favour in the si. 
the king, and if it piesa the king to grant my petition, and 
to perform my request, let the king and Haman come to — 
the banquet that I shall prepare for them, and I will do. 


; 

cruel edict? Perhaps because the plan of the romance required - 

- delay: historical probability is sacrificed to literary necessity. 
The book must be judged from its character and aim—a romance 
expressing and helping to sustain the patriotism of the people. | 

8. What wilt thou ? lit., ‘ what is to thee?’ i.e. as in Joshua — 
xv. 13, ‘ what desirest thou?’ ‘it shall be given,’ &c. Render, © 
*(desirest thou anything) up to the half of the kingdom ? ‘Then — 
it shall be given ;’ cf. Mark vi. 23. Note the exaggeration born of - 
Oriental politeness. When to-day in the bazaars of Cairo or . 
Jerusalem one begins to bargain, the vendor will often aa 
take it for nothing’: see Gen. xxiii. 11. ] 

4, If it seem good, &c.: see on Neh, ii. 5. 

let the king and Haman come: the initials of the Hebrew 
words so translated make up the consonants of Yahweh OR) 
—vowel signs were unknown until some centuries after Christ. 
Jehring, Bullinger, and others say this Divine name is intended to 
be thus brought into the book, which otherwise has no name for ; 
God. But we have here merely an interesting coincidence. — 

6. banquet of wine: referring to the Persian custom of hand- 
ing round fruit, and pees wine after the meal proper? : by i 
vii. 2,7; Dan. i. 5, 8. ari 

~ even to, &c. :_render as in ver. 3, changing the verb only. % 





? Her, i. 133. ae Eee 
te ee tS 


ma 
2 


Pay SA? 


“to-morrow as the ‘king hath said. Then went Haman 9 
- forth that day joyful and’ glad of heart: but when 
Haman saw Mordecai in the king’s gate, that he stood 
not up nor ®moved for him, he was filled with wrath 
against Mordecai. Nevertheless Haman refrained him- 10 
-self, and went home; and he sent and fetched his friends. 
_and Zeresh his wife. And Haman recounted unto them 11 
- the glory of his riches, and the multitude of his children, 
® Or, trembled before him Faget 


_ 8. to-morrow: Esther wants the king and Haman to be her 

' guests at another banquet, then she will tell the king her petition 

(see vii. 7ff.). In itself the reticence of the queen after the king’s © 

- double assurance (verses 4, 6) is inexplicable, but from the point 

_ of view of the tale one may understand it all, Of coursesome 
things said or done at the banquet might have had a close con- _- 
nexion with Esther’s purpose, though that is not stated or — 

hinted at. 

9-13. Haman’s pride and envy. 

_ 9. Mordecai in the king’s gate (see on ii. 19): he had now 

_ evidently taken off his mourning garb: see on iii. 2, 

Ee ‘mor moved, &c.: better, ‘nor trembled before’ him,’ as 

 R.Vm. 

_ 10. Haman refrained himself, &c.: surely, however, he acted 

a wise part in consulting his wife and friends, though Paton 

. _thinks he ought at once to have wreaked his vengeance on Mordecai, 

_ ~ friends: in vi. 13 called ‘ wise men.’ 

3 Zeresh : the origin of this name is very uncertain. Some 

_ scholars (J. Oppert, &c.) derive it from the Persian ser= ‘gold,’ 

with ending sh, so ‘golden’: cf. the-Greek names ‘Chryses,’ | 

_ ‘Chryseis.’ Jensen, desiring a mythological explanation, has 

at different times sought the origin of the name in Kirisha, the 

- name of an Elamite goddess, and in Sivis, the name of a Babylonian 

; " goddess—both suppositions philologically impossible. 

iil. his riches: see on iii. 9. 

x the multitude of his children: he had ten sons (see ix. 

7. ). The Targ.( says he had in all two hundred and eighteen 
‘sons. Among Jews!', Persians*, &c., it was thought a great 

_ honour to have many sons. c 

; : children: this is correct, though the Hebrew is the 

usual one for ‘sons’; but we do not say ‘sons of Israel.’ 


_ 7 Gen. xxx. 20; Ps. exxvii. 4 f. 2 Her. i 136. 
oe Re fie Zz 2 : 





338 | =a ee Fic 








and how he had alivatioed him above the princes” 
‘12 servants of the king. -Haman said moreover, Yea, oes 
the queen did let no man come in with the king unto the 
banquet that she had prepared but myself; and to- 
morrow also am I invited by her together with the king. 

13 Yet all this availeth me nothing, so long as I see Mordecai 
14 the Jew sitting at the king’s gate. “Then said Zéresh his 
wife and all his friends unto him, Let a® gallows be made 
of fifty cubits high, and in the morning speak thou unto 
the king that Mordecai may be hanged thereon : ; then go 

_ thou in merrily with the king unto the banquet. ‘And the 
thing pleased Haman; and he caused the calms ng 
be made. 

6 On that night » could not the king sleep; and he con 


® Heb. tree. > Heb. the king's sleep fled from him. 2 





princess - Servants : see on i, 3, FO tz) 
12. did let no man come: better, ‘brought no one.’ There is 
in the language an allusion to the custom of sending servant~ mens 
' —bring guests : see v. 14 ; Luke xiv, 17. 3 
13. availeth me nothing: lit. ‘is not SnOMerAte for me’ + see on | 
i. 22 and iii. 8. , 
14. The advice of Haman’s wife and friends. = 
gallows: better, ‘ stake or pole for impaling,’ lif. ¢ thee? thlen 
‘wood,’ and so ‘anything made of wood”: see Gen. xl, 19; 
viii. 29, &c. ; see on ii. 23. The length—about 80 feet—is very. 
great, whether we understand gallows or stake: perhaps the text - 
has suffered corruption. According: to vii. 9, it could be put into 
Haman’s house. The two Targs. and Joseph. make sundry ‘in- 
teresting additions at this point : see Paton, 240 ff. ; sha 
hanged: render ‘impaled’: see on ii. 23 pi on “Ezra 


Viv BL Eee 
7 > 2h 


: 
. 
, 
3 
j 


VI. 1-13. MorpbEcal FOR HIS SERVICES To THE ‘Kine: HONOURED | 
AND PROMOTED. ao ES 
tf. The king, learning of Mordecai’s loyal conduct, wishes to 
veward him. ge 
1. could not ... sleep: see R.Vm, for literal 







the Took of records Be the chroniles,» aft 


oat Mordecai had told: of Bigthana and Teresh, ~ 70 























paBatvid-soustit to lay beni on the king Ahasuerus. _ 
the king said, What honour and dignity hath been 3_ 
me to Mordecai for this? Then said the king’s servants _ 
“that ministered unto him, There is nothing done for him. 

ad the king said, Who is in the court? Now Haman 4 
‘come into the outward court of the king’s house, to 
yeak unto the king to hang Mordecai on the gallows | 
at he had prepared for him. And the king’s servants 5 
unto him, Behold, Haman standeth in thecourt. And 
® Heb. threshold. 


, LXX, &c., give as cause of the Ring's sleeplessness that 
Feebik his sleep away. 

the book of records, &c.: see on ii. 23, where a shorter . 
ie occurs for the same. Such records would hardly supply  —_ 
‘most entertaining reading for a sleepless monarch ; but the : 
al“of the tale hangs on the reading just now of these t 
norials. = 
and they ‘were read : better, as in the Hebrew, ‘ they were ' 
ee i, e. through the whole’ night. 

Por this verse see ‘on ii. 2r. 

Te is passing strange that the king should have forsake 
actor who had saved his life’; see on ii: 22.(end of note). 
King’s servants: see on i. 3. 2 
28. Haman commanded to heap honours upon his great foe - 


_ 0 is in the court? Some high officials woultl be altyays 
nc harge | of the court. It happened that Haman was now one : 


a ombwaza court: seé iv. 11 and v. 1.- The exact plan’of the 
> complex is a matter of uncertainty, though the excavations =~ 
Loftus, and especially of the’ French engineer Dieulafoy, have 
d considerably ‘to make a reconstruction possible. See : 
» Daniel,’ Camb. Bible, p. 125. ss 
oe not enter the inner court tncommanded ‘see iv. 
hang. : gallows substitute ‘impale... stake.” a 


340° ESTHER e 6 





6 the king said, Let him come in. 
And the king said unto him, What shall beddne watts 
man whom the king delighteth to honour? Now Haman 
said in his heart, To whom would the king delight to-do . 

7 honour more than to myself? And Haman said unto the 
king, For the man whom the king delightethto honour, 

8 let royal apparel be brought which the king useth to wear, 
and the horse thatthe king rideth upon, “and on the 

9 head of which a crown royal is set: and let the apparel 
and the horse be delivered to the hand of one of the 
king’s most noble princes, that they may array or man 

* Or, and the crown royal which is set upon his head 





5. come in: i.e. to the royal bedchamber. 

6-9. Haman, saying “in his heart’ (=thinking) that he mae, 
could be meant, proposed the very highest distinctions for ‘the 
‘man whom the king delights to honour.’.. Compare a cont: 
example in the Nathan-David incident reported 2 Sam. xii. 1 fi. 
(‘Thou art the man’) 

6. The Talm. Meg., 7A, says that since the writer of Esther 
knew what was in Haman’s heart he must have been inspired! - 

7f. For the man, &c.: though the Hebrew can bear this con- 
struction (acc. of reference), we have here probably an anaco- 
luthon, due to the king’s haste in speaking, well imitated by the 
author: ‘The mam... honour, and let (for-him) royal, &e, 
The division of verses here is peculiarly unfortunate, » tho 

In 8f. Haman enumerates the things which Persian kings were 
wont to consider marks of high honour for nee 
see on ii. 23. 

8. which the king useth, &c.: render, ora 

_ Hebrew, ‘ which the king has (actually) worn.’ riheh a og eds 
Wild.) refers to an incident in Persian history in 
Tiribaz the coat which he had on, though he was not shen are it 
and.on the head, &c.: horses wearing ci OF 

ments can be, seen on the ‘Assyrian monuments : see ard, 
Nineveh and its Remains ©), ii. pp. 353, 356, &c.. 

The rendering of the R. Vm. (so Vulg. and Targ.@ oes Tare.) 
whichis contrary to the Hebrew, is due to the difficul - 
of ‘crowned horses.’ Modern discovery has remove this difficulty. 
A crown is not among Mordecai’s decorations in verses 9 anc 


 lArtax. 24. 5y * 5) ee aes 





. . ESTHER 6. 10-13 341 
_withal weal the king delighteth to honour, and cause 
him to ridé on horseback through the’ street of the city, 
and proclaim before him, Thus shall it be done to the 
“man whom the king delighteth to honour. Then the to 
: king said to Haman, Make haste, and take the apparel and 
the horse, as thou hast said, and do even so to Mordecai 

_ the Jew, that sitteth at the king’s gate: let nothing fail of 
“all that thou hast spoken. Then took Haman the apparel 11 
and the horse, and arrayed Mordecai, and caused him te \ 
“ride through the street of the city, and proclaimed before ~ 
him, Thus shall it be done unto the man whom the king 
_delighteth to honour. And Mordecai came again to the 12 
_king’s gate. But Haman hasted to his house, mourning 
and having his head covered. And Haman recounted 13 
unto Zeresh his wife and all his friends every thing that 
“had befallen him. Then said his wise men and Zeresh 
~his wife unto him, If Mordecai, before whom thou hast 





and proclaim, &c. : D. Cassel refers to a story in the 
, Avabian Nights, in which a disgraced Arab chief is led through 
a city seated backwards on a camel, the people hurling at him 
epithets of reproach. 
9. Cf Gen. xli. 43. The writer (as Rosenthal first pointed 
: out) seems to have before his mind the history of Joseph: see 
: vill, 6. 
_. 10. Mordecai the Jew: a member of the doomed race, as was 
Parner though the story has so far proceeded as if up to the 
present this was unknown: see on ii. 8-Io. 
hat sitteth at the king’s gate: favouring the view (so the 
versions, &c.) that Mordecai held an official position: see on 
ii, 19. 
11. Haman obeyed the king” 's orders, though inwardly he must - 
“have rebelled. 


~ ra-13. Haman returns home bitterly disappointed. 
12>, head covered : a sign of grief: see vii.8; 2 Sam. xv. 303, 
Jer. xiv. 4, &c. 
13. his friends...his wise men: the same men are 
meant: seé v. Io, 14. : 
If Mordecai, &c.: the words rest on the prediction that 


~ 
-> 


6 


342 - ESTH ER. ba ZS 


begun to fall, be of the seed of the 
prevail against him, but shalt surely 
14 While they were yet talking with him, came me the 
_ chamberlains, and hasted to bring Haman 1 ea th 7 
banquet that Esther had prepared. = ‘kee ~ 
7 So the king and Haman came ® to banquet W witl 
2 the queen. And the king said again unto Esthé 
second day at the banquet of wine, What is th 















thy eaisest?. even to the half e the kingiotig ‘it sk 
3 performed. Then Esther the queen answered and said, 
If I have found favour in thy sight, O king, and if it 
please the king, let my life be given me at my petition, 
_4 and my people at my request: for we are sold, I and my 
people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to perish. — 
if we had. been sold for bondmen and bone . 
® Heb. 40 drink. ; 4 
ear ae Amalek, Haman being a aig of that | 
race: see on iii. t.and see Exod. xvii. 16; Num, XXIV 203. 
Deut. xxv. 17-19; 1 Sam. xv; 2 Sam. i. 8ff, haat: 
aie 





14-VIl. 4. EsTHER’s sEcOND Banouet: HER GREAT. 
AT LAST) UTTERED—THAT SHE AND HER PEOPLE MAY BE 


- ee 2: iaedne 


SPARED, 
14. the king’s chamberlains - eunuchs. St egal iti 
hasted to bring Haman, &c. : see ont. 12,» ts it ft iS 
the banquet : see v. 8, 12. Y Spud eed 







vii. 1. to banquet: the verb is a denominative from le noun 
rendered ‘feast’ (+ banquet) : see on’i. 3. _ The R.Vm. is “alto- 
gether wrong, and is due to a superficial knowledge of He rew. 
2. Seeiv.3, 6. ie ore 

banquet of wine: see on v. 6. eee ie ae 
3f. Why does the queen hold back her real request u : 
Perhaps to avoid divulging the fact of her being: a Jewess, but : 








see on v. 8, Phe er ain 

_ 4. we are sold, &c.: referring to Haman’s she 

see on). ‘wich 3 x 
waif But if, &c.: the sense of this very difficult. : stan ' 


ee the (=our) distress (in such slavernie vou 


“a Dm 


re Fy akg —-s te 
Ce 3 oe ee 





| held n my peace; *although the adversary could not 


; Ei als = ag ESTHER 18 meh 343 


‘ha ye compensated for the king’s damage. Then spake 52s 








Ahasuerus and said unto Esther the queen, Who 
s he, and where is he, that durst presume in his ara: to 


=f his wicked Haman. Then Haman was afraid before the | 
ing and the queen. And the king arose in his wrath 7 
from. the banquet of wine’ avd went into the palace 
: : and Haman stood up to make request for his life 
4 ) Esther the queen; for he saw that there was evil - 
determined against him by the king. Then the king re § 
- Or, Sor our affliction is not to be compared with the king’ s damage| 





been (great) enough (to be removed) at the price of the king’s 
0 (were we to be set free).’ This rendering, including the 
sracketed words, can be all of it obtained from the Hebrew text 
ithout changing a single consonant and but one vowel, though 
in other parts of the book (see ver, 67) the word rendered 
‘distress’ (lit>‘straitnmess” ; see on ii. 18) means ‘ adversary.” 
next best of a dozen or more other renderings is that 
“suggested by Oettli, which makes a slight change in the “Hebrew : . 

*for the deliverance (from this bondage) would not be. (great) 
an (to be obtained) at the price of the king’s loss.’ 


) 5-10. Fail and punishment of Haman. 







> S; The king and queen being now alone, the latter mentions _ 


yy name thie man to whom the :project for massacring the Jews 





that darst presume in his heart: Heb., “whose heart has 

‘fil him to do so’: !see Acts:v.:3.'In the psychology ofthe 

brews the heart is the seat of the'understanding, and so stands, 
here, for the intellect: itself. 

E: &. An adversary ...an enemy: the first word has reference 
o conduct—‘ one who acts against >; the second_werd.to feeling 
—fone who has ill-will towards’ : so the Hebrew. words may be_ 

differentiated. 

_ %. arose: Heb., ‘ was rising.’ ate i 1s Se 

» banquet of wine: see.on v.-6: 

and went:..the words are > implied (pregnantly) 3 in the © 

preposition, and needsnot be italicized. : 

PS _ palace garden= sce on i. 5.: or 

res ‘determined: Heb., ‘ completed’ see L Sonos XMpoheie _2Sam. 

x . 175 aoe ¥, i3 3 (or same verb). it 2: Bs Riouc t 


kt er 
= 










= 








couch whereon Esther was. Then pS the king, v 

even force the queen before me in the house i 
"word went out of the king’s mouth, they covered E 
9 face. Then said Harbonah, one of the am 
that were before the king, Behold also, the 4 gallo 
cubits high, which Haman hath made for Mordece 
spake good for the king, standeth in the house of } ‘ 
ro And the king said, Hang him thereon. So they hz 1 
Haman on the gallows that he had prepared as ! 
Then was the king’s wrath pacified. oy 


® Heb. free. 





‘itr ne 
__8. Haman was fallen, &c.: the words mean simply that. 
Haman was lying suppliantwise at the queen’s feet in the manner 
of the country and time (see the monuments), and the ‘king must 
have known this. Perhaps, however, he was glad to have any 
_ pretence for the punishment he intended to inflict upon Haman 


Seen see on i. 6, s: PF vis 







in Rawlinson ole: ); ef. vi. r2 (see on). 
The king’s word or question (will he, &c.) was eq! a | 
a sentence of death to those who knew him. Condamin, &c. 
depending on the LXX, slightly alterthe M.T. reading, ‘Haman’ 
face grew red,’ which is much simpler: ~ Jee ears! eae 
9. Harbonah: in i. ro the final consonant is different, — fa oF 
Chamberlains: see on i. To, NPE Bs er 
+ gallows: see on ii. 23. SU 
| for Mordecai: LXX ‘for impaling (hanging?) Mor 
who spake good, &c.: see ii, 21 f,, vi. ais ch i: 
30; Jer. xxxii. 42. 
in the house of Haman: how could an. -eighty-fo 
pole be got into any one’s house?) See on'v. 14. © vue 










Hang: better, ‘impale’: see on ii, 2g, 0) 4 he 
Ap. Ps. vii. 15 f. was fulfilled in Haman’s one oF 

“hanged: render, ‘impaled,’ a Rb 

pacified : see on ii. 1. ve 1 


~ 


F fee" 9 ‘ 
Sa ee fer eS ey. Oe 


z ae 
" aS s i 
oe ens 


i 2 is : = 


Bey ESTHER 8. 4 pe” ane 


x On that any did the king Ahasuerus give the house of 8 
“Haman the Jews’ enemy unto Esther the queen. And 
“Mordecai came before the king ; for Esther had told what 
he was unto her. And the king took off his ring, which 2 
he had taken from Haman, and gave it unto Mordecai. 
And Esther set Mordecai over the house of Haman. And 3 
Esther spake yet again before the. king, and fell down” 
at his feet, and besought him with tears to put away the 
mischief of Haman the Agagite, and his device that he ~~" 
had devised against the Jews. Then the king held out 4— 
to Esther the golden sceptre. So Esther arose, and 











: VIII. 

_ if. Mordecai succeeds to Haman’s honours, wealth, and position. 

__ 1. The king transfers Haman’s property to the queen. In Persia 
the property of criminals doomed to death was confiscated by the 
state (see Her. iii. r29; Jos. Antigq. xi. 1, 3 and 4, 6). 

the house of Haman: i.e. his property (see Gen. xxxix. 4 

‘xliv. r; 1 Kings xiii. 8; Job viii. 15). 

, for Esther had told, &c.: prior to this the king does not 

seem to have known that Esther and Mordecai were cousins (see- 

“li. J, II. 22, iv. 4-16). 

For his personal service in rescuing the king Mordecai had been 
(as Wild. remarks) rewarded (see vi. 6 ff.). The fresh honours.and 

emoluments came to him through his connexion with the queen, 
though, of course, his previous conduct had predisposed the king 
towards him. 

_ 2. his ring: see on iii. ro. - Through being invested with the 
Signet ring Mordecai became Grand. Vizier in succession to 

Haman. : 

_ Esther set, &c.: Mordecai became steward of Haman’s 
estate, which must babe been considerable (see iii. 9, 11, Vv. I1, 
ix. Io). 

3-17. Neutralizing of the anti-Jewish decree. 

346. Esther's petition for the révocation of the decree. — Since 
‘Mordecai the Jew” was now prime minister, and the date fixed 
for the massacre was nearly a ‘year off, there seems no urgent 
reason why Esther should‘again*risk her life (see-ver. 4) to plead 
for the withdrawal of the decree. Perhaps the aim‘is to exalt'the — 
Patriotism of Esther, é 

8. fell down at his' feet: see on vii. 8and cfiv.2. 

’ the king held out‘... the golden'sceptre: Esther must.once 


EAE ESTHER 8. | 
eae y 
5. stood before the king. And she Said, 
king, and if I have found favour in his. 
the thing seem right before the kingpand I be p 
in his eyes, let it be written to reverse the letters d 










he wrote to destroy the Jews which are in all fs, i 
6 provinces : for how can I endure to see the evil ‘th: 
' shall come unto my people? or how can I endure to see 
7 the destruction of my kindred? ‘Then the king Ahasue- 

rus said unto Esther the queen and to Mordecai the Jew, . 

Behold, I have given. Esther the house of Haman, and 

him they have hanged upon the gallows, because he laid. 
8 his hand upon the Jews. Write ye also *to the Jews 


* Or, concer EE 






more have presented herself before the king ambiddent ees on iv. 
11). But the queen on the present) oceasion’ ‘has beapn to eek . 
before the sceptre is held out to her. = 
5. If it please, &c.: see on Neh. ii, 7. The ‘penne ap of 

| adulatory epithets accords well with the ways of the East even 
now. ‘ 1. 

right: Heb! kasher (cf. kosher). In post- biblical: Heinew | 
the word stands for'what is in accordance with. ee 


food, drink,’ &c. und ate liaiats 
‘reverse? better, “ revoke’: lit. Scause soireteemm? 35 eae 
letters: see iii, 12-14, and for the word oni. 22,5 4) 


devised by Haman, and therefore revocable. But the king 
cannot accept the argument... _It was the king’s deeree dedegyla 


be altered. set mens 
{Cf Gen) xliv. 34, and see on vi. O. % . gpeykatlost 
Pihaacaa see ii. To; 2o. verie oT phe an 8, 


7f. The king consents, in his own way, to meet Esther’s _ 
wishes, He cannot ‘call back the ‘edict which has gone fi for 
no Persian law is alterable (i. 19), but he can and Mi, T og 
another decree which will make.the other of no. pea 

“7, and: te Mordecai the Jew: , Esther.and the ki 
this time to be alone, and this clause, omitted by mos! 
sions, is rejected by many, modern. editors, | Rare OTs n rite 
Je,’ &e. hres {ocuaiion 

8. Write ye, &c. |: Mordecai, having now the king could 
himself, as;Haman had.doneiii,.r2 fyi issng 


, Bae paths © 5 
“ Sat a Se NE ES 







J 




























ce 
i m 
5 
DQ 
.s 
i=] 
oa 
ie 
n 
gq 
ee 
3 
5° 
& 5 
a 
wee 
i=] 
oo 
wn 
=) 
FS) 
B 
& 


: aa with the king’s cert may no man reverse, - 


en were the king’s scribes called: at that time, in the 9 
‘month, which is the month Sivan, on the three and 


t Mordecai commanded unto the Jews, and to the 
atraps, and the governors and princes of the provinces 
which are from India unto Ethiopia, an hundred twenty 

an seven provinces, unto every province according, to 
the writing thereof, and unto every people after their ~ 
language, and to the Jews according to their writing, 
and according to their language. And he wrote in the 10 
name of king Ahasuerus, and sealed it with the _king’s 





‘Here Esther is associated with Mordecai. © It looks as if 
é words between verses 7 f. had fallen out. 


as weverse': see on'ver. 5. 

we Q-14. ‘The measures taken by Mordecat. » See notes on iii, 12-15, 

re in describing the steps taken by Haman in issuing the first 
e, the language and matter are much the same. 

om 9. This verse is the longest in the hagiographa. rs 
_ the third month ... Sivan, &c.: i.e. two months and ten 

days later than the issue of Haman’s decree (iii. 12 f.). What 

ni ppened i in the interval? See iv. 1 to viii. 2, 

any _ Sivan : one of the Babylonian month names (see on Ezra ix. 


corresponding roughly to our May-June. 
‘Satraps ... governors... princes: sce on lil, 12. 
hundred Senenty and seven provinces : see oni. I. 
SOx - sealed : see on iii, Io. 2 


Ju letters: better, ‘dispatches’ (see on i. me 

_ posts : See on iii. 13. 

~ posts on horseback : better, ‘mounted couriers.’ 

_ | Yiding, &e.: render, ‘riding on swift steeds bred of royal 
ids? For this translation the only textual change necessary is 
removal to the last place of the verse of the one word rendered | 
e ‘royal’ (R.V. ‘used in the king’s service’’ which comes from 
mies noun éshatra (=‘ kingdom’). : =the 


Bes 


seal, &c.: see on iii. ro, “oF 


11 the stud: wherein the king granted the Jews ‘which were 






348 ESTHER 8. weg ‘s Ei 


aswift steeds that were used in the Lindam 






in every city to gather themselves together, and to stand 

for their life, to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish, 
all the power of the people and province that would 
-assault them, ¢hezr little ones and women, and to take the 


12 spoil of them for a prey, upon one day in all the provinces - 


of king Ahasuerus, namely, upon the thirteenth day of the 


13 twelfth month, which is the month Adar. A copy ‘of 


the writing, >that the decree should be given out in ‘every 
province, was published unto all the peoples, and that 


* Or, swift steeds, mules, and young dromedaries ; 
> Or, ¢o be given out for a decree : \ . 


used in the king’s service: in Heb. one word = =‘ royal,’ 
or literally ‘belonging to the kingdom” (see above and ver. 14). 
stud: judging from the Persian and Arabic the word in the 
M.T. =lit. ‘ mares.’ Then it probably came, as here, to have a col- | 
lective sense, as in the E:VV.. In post-biblical Hebrew the word - 
=‘ mule,’ but ‘bred’ of (= ‘descended from”) ‘ mules ” gives, “no 
good sense. 

11> Contents of the new decree. On the day fixed for the 
slaughter of the Jews, who were supposed in the first decree to” 
calmly submit to their fate, the Jews were authorized to defend 
themselves, and in addition (see ver. 1g) to take vengeance, upon 
their foes. 

their life =themselves (Semitic idiom). 
to destroy, &c. : see on iii. rg. ; ; 

12. See on iii. 13. 

[Apoc. Esther xvi. r-24. The letter of Artaxerxes? In this the 
king revokes the former decree (see on verses 7 f. and cf, i. 19), 
charges Haman with trying to get Persia into the hands of the 
Macedonians, while the Jews are said to live by very just laws 
and not to be evil doers. The letter bears on its face clear marks 
of its spuriousness, though it is followed by Josephus, &e. It is 
very aaa from the royal edicts of STS see 
p. 12 ff. 

1g3f. See on iii.14f. Note how the tables are again turned. 
Mordecai’s adversary has been impaled on the stake prepared for 
himself. In the new edictthe Jews are not only to resist being 
massacred, but to turn upon their foes and massacre them—and_ 
they did (ix. 12, 16), oy ry). Tat od 


a Be oe 


~ 


ee er "ESTHER 84-17 | 349 









Reon swift steeds that were used in the king’s service 
| went out, being hastened and pressed on by the king’s 
commandment ; and the decree was given out in Shushan 
4 "the -palace. ‘And Mordecai went forth from the presence 
_ of the king in royal apparel of blue and white, and with 
| a great crown of gold, and with a robe of fine linen and 
“purple: and the city of Shushan shouted and was glad. 
~The Jews had light and gladness, and joy and honour. 
_ And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever 
3 the king’s commandment and his decree came, the Jews 
had gladness and joy, a feast and a good day. And 















_. 14. posts: see on iii. 1g. 

- that rode upon: render, ‘that rode upon swift royal 
steeds.’ 
¥ being hastened, &c.: what need was there? See on 

verses 3-6. 

5 Shushan the palace: see on i. 2 and on Neh. i, 2. 


15-17. Jewish feasting and rejoicing. 

15: royal apparel : see vi. 8, where the same Hebrew Words 
_ are used though a different garment is intended. The grand vizier 
_ was allowed to dress much as the king did, though, according to 
' Rawlinson, the king’s own outer garb was ’purple, or purple em- 
broidered with gold. 
"= crown: not the Heb. word ini. 11 (see on), ii, 17, vi. 8. 
‘the city ... shouted, &c. ; contrast with what is said in iii, 15 
- (See on) ‘ the city was perplexed.’ Would the whole city be so 
_much moved by what affected the Jews? Have we not here and 
“in iii, 15 an exaggeration for the sake of magnifying Jewish in- 
"fluence in Persia? 

16. light: a symbol of prosperity (see Job xxii. 22; xxx. 24 ; 
Ps, xxvii. 1, xxxvi. 9, &c.). 

- gladness: contrast with the sadness of iv. 3. 

“47. province: see on i.I. ‘i 
a@ good day: i.e. a festal day, as in ix. 19, 22: In 
post-biblical Hebrew the word is constantly used in this sense, 
a of the treatises of the Tosephta is called by this name 










, , y a aoe 

350 ESTHER 9. 42) ae 4 
many from among the peoples of the land ne ame Jews; 
for the fear of the Jews was fallen upon them. 
9 » Now in the twelfth month, which is the month 
on the thirteenth day of the same, when ‘the king's 
commandment and his decree drew near to be put in 
execution, in the day that the enemies of the Jews hoped | 
to have rule over them; whereas it was turned to the 
contrary, that. the Jews had? tile Sheena that hate 
athem; the Jews gathered themselves together in their 
cities shidichout all thé provinces of the king Ahasuerus, | 
to lay hand on such as sought their hurt: and no man 
could withstand them; for the fear of them was fallen 





many... became Jews: no other rendering of the words 
is possible, though others have been proposed. Once more the 
tables are turned (see ver. 13). Less than three months back it was 
dangerous to be known as a Jew (see li, 10, &c.). Now it is dan- 
gerous to be thought anything else—and that in Persia, not 
Judaea! 

This mention of proselytes, the earliest in the O.T., woree fat 

the book isnot older than the Greek period (cf. ix, 21). ‘- y 

“ peoples of the land: see on Ezra iii. 3. 

the fear of, &c.: objective gen. (see it af. ‘and cf. aed | 
Xxxv. 5; Exod. xv..16; Deut. xi. 25, &c.). + 


- 





IX. 


1-10. The Jews resist and slaughter their foes.— Tt is, aude. evi 
dent that the Jews did much more than defend themselves (see on 
ver. 13 and on viii, 13 f.). - They put to death (1) 500 in the for- 
tified quarters (ver. 6), (2) goo in the civilian quarter (ver. 15), sud 
(3)"75,000 in the provinces (ver. 16). 

1. im the twelfth months i.e. about nine months. after the 
issuing of the second decree (viii.g). The narrative kad silent as 
to the doings of this interval. ne | 

to have rule: better, ‘to have the mastery, fit, sa: Sie | 
power.’ > 
over them, &c.: punctuate and render (as Siegfried, )y 
‘over them it was turned about (=the tables were aiid, Bs), 
on viii. 13 f.), so that the Jews got the mastery-SePes their. heeaied | 

2. See viii. 11. 

to lay hand om: sce on ii. 2I, 





































the satraps, and the governors, and they that did the 
business, helped the Jews; because the fedr of 
‘Mordecai was fallen upon them. For Mordecai was 4 
al in the king’s house, and his fame went forth through- - 
all the provinces: for the man Mordecai waxed 
er and greater. And the Jews smote all! their 5 
mies with the stroke of the sword, and with slaughter 
nd destruction, and did what they would unto them 
at hated them. And in Shushan the palace the Jews 6 
ew and destroyed five hundred men. And Parshan- 7 
atha, and Sodas and Aspatha, and Saas and 8 


F Oaisces ... Satraps ... governors: see on iii. 12. e 
"they that did the king’s business: see on iii. 9. _ 
helped the Jews: by so doing the official class would be 
‘A helping themselves. See what follows in this and the next two 
erses. 
skis fame: this word =‘ what is said’ (from the point of view 
-ofthespeaker), The Heb. word=‘ whatis heard’ (from the point 
of view of the hearer). 
. the Jews smote all, &c.: Paton, guided by an excessive 
ralism, renders ‘so among their enemie$ the Jews made a 
ting, &c. - The preposition rendered ‘among’ (4) often intro- 
Ss a direct object, and it does so with this very verb in 1 Sam. 
I, Xxiii. 2, &c. The E.VV. are therefore correct. 4 
nd with slaughter and destruction: in Hebrew this is ; 
ran adverbial or circumstantial clause adding force to the - 
pal verb. The idiom is very common in Hebrew, but seems. 
odd when put literally into English. 
4  Shushan the palace: see on i. 2 and on Neh. i. 2. Note the 
arp differentiation between the military (ver. 6) and the civilian 
ers (ver. 14 f.) of Shushan. 
9. The name of Haman’s ten sons appear in various forms in the 
ms, those in the LXX differing much from the orthography 
Hebrew. The names are generally held to be of Persian ~ 
, and gallant attempts have been made to prove this. The 
has many peculiarities in the forms and positions of the letters ~ 
in the arrangement of the names, and the Massorites and 
rs have busied themselves much in explaining these things 
y= wads; Paton, &c.).. 


Aa Facies 


















ro ahd ‘Aridai, and Velicachae the tdcoeeiae 

son of Hammedatha, the Jews’ enemy, sl 

11 on the spoil they laid not their hand. On 

_ number of those that were slain in Shushai 

12 was brought before the king. And the king 

Esther the queen, The Jews have slain and 

» fivé hundred men in Shushan the palace, and 

sons of Haman; what then have they done in the ‘res 

of the king’s provinces! Now what is thy petition and 
it shall be granted thee: or what is thy request irthe 
13 and it shall be done. Then said Esther, If it ple ; 

_ king, let it be granted to the Jews which are in are 

to do to-morrow also according unto this day’s decree, 

and let Haman’s ten sons be hanged” upon the ga 

Ss And the king commanded it so to be done: iheted 

was given out in Shushan; and they hanged faman’s 


3 and e- 


ee ~ 





- 10. but on the spoil they laid not their hand, though | the 
terms of the edict allowed them to (viii. 11), Why did they ‘thus 
restrain themselves? There are many gpesses, one that nett 
Jews wished to remove all suspicion that they were act 'y 
mercenary considerations : s Gen. xiv, 22. 


aidibonal day in which the Jews may take vengeance on as er J 

this time in the civilian quarters. a eo 

12. The Jews have slain 500 men, including Haman’s. ten sons. 
Is the queen satisfied? She is not (see next verse). Be rie 

13. Esther’s petition : viz. that the Jews may have pa 

granted them to massacre their enemies in the civil as they had had in 

the military quarters (ver. 6), and that Haman’s sons, already killed 

~ (verses 7-9), should be impaled. The petition does not say | ‘much. 
for the queen’s humanity, or even for the humanity of t e : 













who created her character. , 7h 
14. The king assents and issues a decree embodying bo : 
requests of the queen. Siar ge aS 


they hanged : render, ‘impaled.’ In the present case st 


events, even if not usually, persons impaled had Bees 
put to death ee. on Ezra vi. Tt), ‘ag 


—_— ar. ~ 3 Z 
iP 


- 25 v fe ESTHER 9. 15-19 353 






ten sons. And the Jews that were in Shushan sateen 
| themselves’ together on the fourteenth day also of the 
month Adar, and slew three hundred men in Shushan ; 
but on the spoil they laid not their hand. And the other 





15 


H 
nN 


_Jewsthat were in the king’s provinces gathered themselves . 


“together, and stood for their lives, and had rest from their 

"enemies, and slew of them that hated them seventy and 
five thousand ; but on the spoil they laid not their hand. 
This was bre on the thirteenth day of the month Adar; 
‘and on the fourteenth day of the same they rested, and 
“made it a day of feasting and gladness. But the Jews 
_ that were in Shushan assembled together on the thirteenth 
day thereof, and on the fourteenth thereof ; and on the 





at 
e 
q 
¢ 
Ks 

h 





fifteenth day of the same they rested, and ae it a day 


of feasting and gladness. Therefore do the Jews of 


pe 15. the fourteenth day: see on verses 16-19. 
three hundred men: cf. ver. 6. One would have ex- 
"pected a larger number in the civilian quarter, where the popu- 
lation was greater. 
4 on the spoil, &c. : see on ver. Io. . 
" 16-19. The institution of Purim ; origin of the two different aays 
_ of tts observance. The provincial Jews brought their acts of de- 


fence and vengeance to an end in one day, the thirteenth, resting” 





on the-following day. The Susa Jews filled two days with 
such acts, the thirteenth and fourteenth, resting on the fifteenth 
“day. This difference is made to explain the divergent usage as 
“regards the day when Purim was observed, in Susa the fifteenth 
‘day, in the provinces the fourteenth. This is, however, a case 
of making history to explain custom: cf. what are called ‘ Aetio- 
‘logical myths,’ the ritual coming first, the myth explaining () it 
coming after '. 
_ Verses 16f. should be read closely together, thus :— 
; “16 Now the other Jews... seventy and five thousand (though 
on thespoil they laid not their hand) 17 on the thirteenth day,’ &c. 
i 18. assembled, &c., for self-defence and slaughter (see verses 







t a day of, &c.: see ver, 17 and viii. 7. 
le. Render, Therefore the Jews of unwalled cities (towns and 
‘hao 


_ 1 See W. Ri Smith, Rel. Sem.® 17. 
j Aa2 


17 


18 


19 


20 


2 


_ 


22 





354 


the villages, that dwell in the Es, Cina 
fourteenth day of the month Adar a day of gladness and 
feasting, and a good day, and of —- ronan one.to 
another. - GPia 
And Mordecai wrote these thin ans cent “eines 
unto all the Jews that were in all the provinces of the 
king Ahasuerus, both nigh and far, to enjoin them that 
they should keep the fourteenth day of the month Adar, 
and the fifteenth day of the same, yearly, as weatk is 


as e5 





villages) are accustomed to keep the fourteenth of the moth Adat 
as asource of joy, as a banquet, as a feast day, and peels for) 
sending portions to one another.’ 
villages: the Heb. word = ‘cities,’ ‘towns,’ or ‘vill: 8 with: 
out walls of defence’ (see Ezek, xxxviii. 21 ; Zech. ii. ii. 8). In Deut, 
iii. 5 they are contrasted with ‘ walled cities.” 
that dwell in the unwalled towns: this clause adds nothing, 
and was, no doubt, originally a marginal gloss to the one Heb. word 
translated in the E.VV. ‘ of the villages,’ 
sending portions: see on Neh, viii. ro. : 
Some codd. of the LXX add what is essential to the sense and 
probably stood originally in the M.T, ; ‘ But dwellers in the cities 
keep also the fifteenth of Adar as a joyful and festal day, sending 
portions to their’neighbours.’ 


20-32. Two dispatches concerning the observance of Purim, one 
sent forth in the name of Mordecat (20-22), the other in the names 0 
Mordecai and Esther (29-32). Since the time of J. D. Michaelis 
(d. 1791) many scholars have been inclined to regard the whole 
of verses 20-32 as an independent piece added by the writer of th 
rest of the book to complete the history. The evidence is no 
very decisive either way, though on the whole eesti an 
matter favour this conclusion (see p. 299). 

20-22. Mordecat’s decree. 

20. these things: i.e. what the letters (ispatches) enjoin, 
not the present book. 

letters: see on i, 22. +13} 
21. keep: Heb. ‘continue to keep” (part.). 
fourteenth . .. fifteenth day: i.e. both days” are 
kept by all Jews. According to verses 17-19 *the- coun 
Jews kept the fourteenth, those of Susa the fifteenth. We ‘hav: 
here probably the fost eventum justification of the later 
modern) practice of observing both days (see on ix, 16-10) = 


: > 


aw 














ee ee no ces ge ee 


P : 
' month which was turned unto them from sorrow to 
| gladness, and from mourning into a good day: that they 
"should make them days of feasting and gladness, and of 
"sending portions one to another, and gifts to the poor. 
And the Jews undertook to do as they had begun, and 
as Mordecai had written unto them; because Haman the 
son of Hammedatha, the Rosie: the enemy of all the 
_ Jews, had devised against the Jews to destroy them, and 
had cast Pur, that is, the lot, to consume them, and to 
"destroy them ; but when ‘he matter came before the king, 


ithe Jewish custom of Heep € two New Year’s Pe and even in 
aay times two Sabbaths, to be sure that an the nation kept the 
iS festival on'the same day. 

_ 22, The words as the days ... into a good day are paves 
t ietictic. 

fn» the, month : render, ‘as the month,’ 

















Bat 93-08, Mordecas? s omnia obeyed. 
23. undertook: the Hebrew verb (cognate with gabbalah) 
" means to accept and recognize as traditional, and therefore obliga- 
ry. ‘It is a great word’ in post-biblical ‘Judaism, but in this 
sense occurs in the O.T. only here and in’ver. 27. 
a The Jews look upon them (1) to’ keep on doing as they had 
begun: (verses 17-19) } (2) to carry out Mordecai’s behest (verses 
art)? “but how could they ‘do See iory things? See on’ 
ver. 21. 


24h ‘An account of Haman’s plot, differing from that in ili, 7-15 — 


:  (&e = Ee ow). 
: 24 “Haman... the Agagite : secon iii. 1. 
% : ‘the « enemy, Ke. : see on iii, Io. 









“devised: see Vili. 3. $ 
‘Pur: see on iii, 7. 

. to) consume them: Heb, hummam, with a en -play on 
‘Haman.’ The verb (=S to confound ”) does not occur in i-ix. 19; 
F nd has been unnecessarily rejected by some editors. It occurs in 
ler. li. 34 (E.VV. ‘ crushed”). 

25. the matter: as this expression is implied in the feminine 


By. 


(=neuter) forms of the verb the italics should be dispensed with. 
Some (Syr., the Targs., Ryssel, &c.) make the feminine suffix 


Bs to Rather, ‘When "she came,” &c. But she has not been 
5 








N 


ms ESTHER  9.'23=25 355 


- wherein the in had rest from their enemies, and the — 


5 


356 Moe ESTHER ®. 


_ 


26 on the alia Wherefore they called these d 


27 them, the Jews ordained, and took upon them, and 












he had devised against the ive should r 
own head ; and that he and his cone shail 


after the name of Pur. ‘Therefore because: of all tl 
words of this letter, and of that which they fad es 
concerning this matter, and that which had come unto 


upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves | 
unto them, so as it should not fail, that-they would keep 
these. two days according to the writing thereof, and 


according to the appointed time 2 Beene every ‘year 5 if 
; - CF esa = we 
mentioned since ver. 13, It will be noted that: “inthe present. 
account, as above explained, Esther's part (see v=vii) is ram 
ignored, which is suggestive of a different source, = “{ 
he commanded by letters: the Heb. here is strange and 
unparalleled. Besides, we know elsewhere of no written decision ; 
of the king pronouncing sentence upon Haman. P Probably, the 
words are a copyist’s marginal gloss. z fy er 4 
he and his sons should be hanged (see on ii/ 23) on. the 
gallows (=‘stake’): apparently at, one time, but according: t to 
vii. 10, ix. 14 Haman’s sons were impaled after their father, 
26. This explains for the first time in. the book why lot is called . 
Pur, i.e. to connect the tale incidents of the. book and its patriot- 








ism with the already existing Persian feast Purim (see ver, 24, Z 


iii. 7). aes 

Purim: the Persian (?). word is pluralized as if Hebrew, ie : 
_ Wherefore should be immediately joined with ver, 27, pe 
Jews ordained,’ &c. The words between forma ei the 
iy 







this letter : see on Ezra iv. 8, where the ‘Aramaic form 

same word occurs. The reference is, of course, to. Mol ied 

dispatch (verses ar f.). a 
this \matter: the theme of the letter (ver, 20 ¢ letters” a: 

27 gives the contents of Mordecai’s dispatch Sue met t (as 

Paton) the substance of ver. 19. Laos f 
such as joined themselves: i.e. proselytes ‘(Gee on n vii, ia 

writing: the ‘letters’ of ver. 20, 


thereof: Heb, ‘their’ (writing); the pssesie ae 






refers in both cases ‘to the two days. 
_ the appointed time: see. on ver. 2r. 





and every city; and that these days of Purim should 


~ o . 


: ESTHER 9. 28-31 357. 


and that these days should. be remembered and kept. 28 


throughout every generation, every family, every province, 


“not fail from among the Jews, nor the memorial of them 


-* perish from their seed.- Then Esther the queen, the 
“daughter of Abihail, and Mordecai the Jew, wrote with 


all > authority to confirm this second letter of Purim. 
And he sent letters unto all the Jews, to the hundred 
“twenty and seven provinces of the kingdom of Ahasuerus, 
with words of peace and truth, to confirm these days of 31 


§ 


q 


2 Heb. be ended. > Heb. strength. 


t 





' 28. family, or clan; subdivision of a tribe (see p. 52). 
seed : descendants. 
No nation in history has shown such solidarity and persistence 
in upholding the ways of the fathers as the Jews. 


29-32. Mordecai’s (and Esther's) second dispatch (letter) eijoin- 
ing fasting and loud lamentation as a part of the Feast.’ The text 
“has evidently been tampered with, for while Esther and Mordecai 
are the agents elsewhere, in ver. 30 it is one only, ‘he’ (unless we 


explain impersonally). This and the fact that in ver. 32 Esther 
confirms by special command what is prescribed in ver. gr make 
_it likely that this second letter is sent to supply what was lacking 
in the first. 


29. Esther. - daughter of Abihail: see on Ui 5. 
wrote: the verb is fem. and implies a fem. subject, though, 
of course, it may be a case of the verb agreeing (in Heb.) with the 
nearest subject. Paton omits all reference to Mordecai i in this verse 
and ‘makes this second dispatch one of the queen’s only. 
“with all authority : i.e. probably (as Keil, Scholz, &e. ) 


. with ‘emphasis.’ ». 


©. this second letter (‘ dispatch”): referring to what follows. 


(wer. 31). For the word letter see on ver. 26. 
‘30. Not in the LXX. 
“ohe: de. Mordecai, if the text is correct (see on 29-32). 
/ letters: see on i. 22. ° 
hundred twenty and seven provinces : see on i. 1. a! 
'. with words, &c.:'render, ‘with words of greeting and of 
faithfulness.’ _ Probably these words were on the outside. of each 
dispatch” ‘(letter) sent out. There is no need to italicize with,’ 


_ aS it is contained in the accus. case implied: ‘Words of’ are 
hardly in apposition with letters (as Bertheau-Ryssel, &c.). 


a9 


3° 








:Purk! fig theit i ape ise cc 
_ the Jew and Esther the. queen had nei 9 


32 in: the matter of the fastings: and) cabs 
~commandment of Esther: confirmed ‘these. 
Tei and it was written in the: tomes ORS 









31. to confirm (or ‘establish’) these days, &e. >” mit 
reference to what is mentioned in the end of the verse. 
pose of the second dispatch was to establish fasting and Jo 
lamentation (see iv. 1, 3) as an essential part of the feast. 
in the matter of, &c. : better, ‘as regards the acts sof f 
_and their (accompanying) lamentation.” See for the idi 
' or ‘things of’ ( =‘ instances’ or ‘acts of’) § Brief Studie ‘ 
_ Criticism’ bythe present writer in Orientalische Studien on 
‘ii, li, 648. ; y 
their (cry): refers to the acts of fasting, the loud tamenta- 45 
tion accompanying fasting (see iv. I, 3). fas 
32. The queen issues a mandate confirming what Mordecai had z 
in his two dispatches enjoined. . 
the book: the word in plural is translated letters” in yer 0 . 
(See on i: 22).. Perhaps Esther issued a dspel of cher own, 

endorsing what her cousin had done. Akitas if t 


x. 1-3. The king. and his tribute. Mordeca’’s. greatness, 
section hangs loosely on to what precedes, and is almost 
an addition made from a larger record (see on ver. ee | 
pose of extolling the king =e hia Brig seagate who bulk so 
largely in the book... e1fT cpa | 
1. laid a tribute: the purpose is not stated.) yk Le 
_ isles of the sea=the lands washed by the Med 
Sea. The extent of the king’s dominions shows shel agotherthan 
Xerxes can be-meant; row boxg: ast f 
With this verse and. the ‘Srek half of the ont ane 
Xerxes. abruptly ends, though, in the sources used there” 
probably a detailed record of that king’s reign and Sanaa viypt 





Se Phe 





2. might: the Heb. word is used collectively : : 4 
valiant es as inf Kings xv, 23% ; 1 Chron, XxiK 90, BO. er 
aN > + hea 





™~™ 


oe “fs lait ESTHER 1 ede ea 359 





bi are they not written in the book of the chronicles 
of the kings of Media and Persia? For Mordecai the 
Jew was next unto king Ahasuerus, and great among ~ 
_ the Jews, and accepted of the multitude of his brethren ; 
: seeking the good of his people, and speaking peace to all 
; his seed. 















~ pook of the chronicles, &c. : the allusion is to a history of 

S mts nee of Media and Persia, probably the official records kept 
* year by year and reign by reign, referred to in li, 23, and vi. I. 
1 There is no reason to doubt that every Persian subject and even 
; “others properly recommended could consult such records. The 
part dealing with the reign of Xerxes might be expected to give 
fullinformation about such a grand vizier as this book makes him 
he out tobe, Though the book is not written for the history in it, 
, yet its tale must at least bear the appearance of history, like the 

Hellenized romances of Ktesias. 

_ 3. accepted of= ‘liked’ (so the Hebrew). 

__ Speaking peace: render (with Sieg., &c.), ‘caring for the — 
_ well-being of ’ (see Ps. Ixxxv. 8 (9); Zech. ix, 10). The word - 
translated ‘ peace’ never eer that, nor is the idea of peace in its, 
root, verbal or nominal : it=‘ completeness’, then ‘ perfect well- 
being ’—nothing lacking se on Ps, cxix. 165, Century Bible). 














a 








a [Ap. Esther x. 4-13. Epilogue describing how the Feast of 
_ Purim was éstablished. | 3 





/ 


that the present writer answers the above question 


professed any other religion than that of Zarathustra: they are — 





ADDITIONAL NoTE#s are 
x. WAS CYRUS THE GREAT A “ZOROASTRIA 
Ir will be seen from the notes in this volume (see pp. 14, 40. 














‘affirmative, as have nearly all writers in the past and as 
modern writers. It must be admitted, however, that the evi 
is scanty and indecisive. The number of Cyrus. ineeript 
have been found is but small, the most im 

Cyrus Cylinder ? (see p. 14) and the Nabonidus’ Cyrus Gc 
both in the British Museum. In both Cyrus speaks of hi 
a worshipper of Marduk and as recognizing other Ba 
deities, Bel, Nebo, &c., just as in Ezrai. 2 he ascribes t 
the victories he had won, and as Darius I at a later time Tecog- “a 
nized Apollo. But in no extant inscription of Cyrus i is | ae . 
rémotest hint of his connexion with Zoroastrianism. 

be due to the fact that almost all the contemporary records of 
reign have been lost—assuming that a goodly number of sich 
at one time existed, in harmony with the customs of the , 
It should be remembered, howé€ver, that there is not a syllable | a 
the Cyrus inscriptions known to us intimating that this great king 


4 


simply silent-as to his own religion. Some have interpreted | the 
free way in which he allows himself to be written down as 
a worshipper of the gods of Babylon as well as of Yahweh 
as a proof of indifferentism or Agnosticism in religion, and that - 
his tolerance was dictated by policy pure and simple (see p. 40). , 
But the trilingual inscriptions found at Behistun, Persia *, prove — 

that Darius Hystaspis was an almost fanatical “upholder of ; 
Mazdaism (= Zoroastrianism) ; yet in the Gadatas in tion 

he associates himself with the worshippers of Apollo as if he were 





1 The author regrets that he has failed to obtain access to an article 
by Professor A. V. Williams Jackson in The Yournal of the American J 
Oriental Society, vol. xxi, pp. 160-84. The subject treated 
is ‘ The Religion of the Achaemenian Kings,’ and its value is vouched 
for by the name of the writer: Dr. L. H. Gray adds an Appendix. 

2 See text and translation in Schrader, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, 
iii. 121 ff.; H. C. Rawlinson, Yournal of the R.A. S., 1880, 7 

‘ Schrader; op. cit., 167 ff.; Pinches, SBA., I. vii. 139-76. ak 

* See FRAS., 1847, for text and translation "by H:'G avlnet, 
and especially the new and greatly improved edition issued i in 190 
by the British Museum. See; for a revised translation, Redorlte i 


| the Past, i. Log ff. * See Pp: towR | 


~ . : aie | | 


> . ee » wer aly 
; . Ry? ee, Ce eg ' 


; _ ADDITIONAL "NOTES 361 


~ of the same religion as themselves. The Plewatich displayed by ~ 
_. the early Persian kings is to be explained rather from the lofty — 
ethical principles of the religion they professed, (see p. 15)— — 
Zarathustraism (Zoroastrianism), as the present writer maintains.. 
Yet as Darius is so explicit in his utterances concerning his religion | 
it is admittedly strange that Cyrus should have kept silence re- 
garding the matter. Perhaps, however, if we possessed Cyrus in- 
‘seriptions in as great an abundance as we do inscriptions of Darius 
it would be found that he too was a zealous adherent of the same 
faith, though, of course, he might have been less outspoken than 
_ Darius on religious questions: it is not always the man whe 
_ speaks most about religion that is most religious. 
_ There is nothing in the records which have come down to us 
that suggests a change in the religion of Persia between 529 when 
Cyrus died and 521 when Darius I began to reign. If the two 
_ kings were of different religions some indication of the consequent 
_ changes in the religious attitude of the government must have 
_ survived. Among those who say that Cyrus was a Zarathustran 
‘the following may-be named, leaving out the older writers who 
_ were practically all of this opinion : Ewald, Kuenen?, Renan ®, 
_ McCurdy*. (who, however, wrongly identifies the old Iranian 
; religion| with Zoroastrianism), Ndldeke*®, Guthe®, Gunkel?, 
Bertholet®, Budde*, Wilhelm’ (Jena), and Staerk® (Jena). 
| Several recent scholars, however, hold that Darius I was the 
first Persian king to profess. Zarathustraism: thus Sayce®, 
_ Pinches? (who says Cyrus, as, his Anzan forefathers, was a 
- Polytheist), E. Meyer*®, and Sir, Henry, Howorth’, Dr, E, 
Lehmann of Copenhagen®, comes to the conclusion that the 
evidence is insufficient to permit of a decision on either side 
_ of this controversy. But it is hard to think that the king of Persia 
_ in 521 supported a different religion from that of his predecessors 
during the foregoing eight or nine years, without there being the 
slightest indication of the change in any of the records, which 
_ have reached us. Note, moreover, that Darius I claims that. on. 
coming: to the throne he restored the religion of his ancestors 
J which Gelungta the Magian had suppressed ra 


















a ah nHtistory F Isr asl Vv. 40s 2 The Religion of Israel, tix 139 fe 
_ |» 4 History of thé)People of Israel, iti. 382. 
\* History, Prophecy, and the Monuments, iii: 4209 f., ahi D. got 


ako, Communicated orally to the writer. y Henoditerss p: 440.) 
- «"\ The! Old: Testament in the Light. of the Historical Records 
4 ridden and Babylon, 423. 8 Geschichte: &cs tii. 126.. ») 


_* Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte, edited by Chantepie de la 
Saussaye, ii. 156. 

_ © Behistun inscriptions, col: i. 14: Records of the Past, i. p. 115 3 
FF British Museum edition, p. 168.) S 


a 4 






















eaole 1, é ravk - 
2, “WERE THE. EARLY. PERSIAN. KI 


“TOWARDS THE VOTARIES OF OTHER 
THAN THEIR OWNt me 


Gein (Ezra aii, Didctad I (Ezra vf), and 
_ toend of Nehemiah), and the present -writer answe 
_ tatingly in the affirmative: see for illustration ‘and 
-is said on pp. 14 f., 40, and roa. It has been repeatedly ste 
_ the sympathy shown by the’early Persian kings towards 
and their religioh arose from their consciousness of 
affinity between Zarathustraism and Yahwism: but even if th 
affinity were as close as it'is held to be’ (Zarathustra was not 
strictly a ‘monotheist but a duotheist); how came’ C 
Darius I to show equal favour towards the ~ t 
ethically inferior religions of Babylon and Greece? Tt 
that the official decrees in which the above kings are made to 
_ speak ‘of themselves as worshippers of the gods of: is i 
Greece ‘as well as of Yahweh were worded by the priests of the 
various cults concerned ; but it is highly improbable that these — 
kings would allow foreign priests to make them say what was 
false, especially if there was a tendeney in what was written: to 
compromise them ‘with the priests of their own elena 
therefore with the leaders among their own people. at tes 
Lehmann? seems to think that Zarathustraism was are ‘ 
and he refers to the Avesta for support, sincé in it political’ 
well as religious opponents are classed with what belongs’ tothe — 
kingdom of evil, and are therefore in the name ‘of Ahuramazda to 
be persecuted out of existence. But the atithor does etacionie fl 
‘the period to which his description: applies. It is’ known that the — 
Avesta a8 we have it, including the often ferocious Gathas, belongs — 
to’ the time of the Sassanids (a. D, 226-641), whenvall the great ; 
réligions seem to have given themselves up very freely: to the: 
bitterest persecution. pinta: aga . 
It has been pointed out*as an ‘Restration! ‘ots the ‘intolerance of 
the early Persian kings that Cambyses destroyed the Egyptian — 
temples, though he spared the Jewish temple at Yeb? because 
the religion was akin to his own. \But when Cambyses invaded 
Egypt on the occasion referred to his purpose was to. punish the — 
priests of Memphis for some acts of disloyalty against Persia of 
which they had-been guilty. The sacréd'bull Apis was killed by — 
the» Persian oh the eg A spirits among Oe enemas 





5 aed ene f 
1 Opvcit., p. 183) (grd ed., ps 201). cae al eam 
2 Sachau Papyri, i. 14.) | me Aanoitt- giving 


Shes. Lee 





-. ADDITIONAL NOTES - 363, 





either imprisoned or put to death }, “This was probably the 
_ occasion on which Cambyses did what the Sachau Papyri ascribe 
- tovhim; the dates agree well. But this destruction of the 
_ Egyptian temples was a political not a religious act, as was the 
_destruction of the Magian temple by Darius 1”. 
_ For a contrary view of Cambyses’ conduct see G. Rawlinson, 
: Ancient Monarchies , iii. 394. 








%) 


3. NOTE TO EZRA VIII. 2 (sre PAGE 128). 


ee ay en 


Clay has found an interesting parallel to this notching in the 
Kassite tablets (B.c. 1800-1200), on some of which are lists of 
_ names ticked off by a stylus applied to the clay. 


kik ie. | 


4. NOTE TO ESTHER II. 12-15 (SEE PAGE 319). 


In his newly-issued work (see p. 305 for full title) Cosquin 
submits to a testing examination the theories of the Esther legend 
represented by de Goeje, Jensen, and Paul Haupt. The first 
- (followed by Kuenen, August Miller, and Dyroff) held that we are 
to seek the origin alike of the Esther romance and of the Shahriar | 
tale of the Thousand and One Nights in an old Persian tale®. 
~Cosquin follows A. W. O. Schlegel in tracing this old Persian 
_ tale back to a Sanskrit source. He points out, moreover, that the 
Esther legend differs too much to have a common origin with 
either the Persian or Arabian romance. As against Jensen’s 
identification of Vashti (Mashti) with an alleged Elamite goddess 
“Vashti, Cosquin summons the authority of the greatest living 
- Elamite _palaeographer, R. P. Scheil, for the statement that. the 
Elamite name is Part, not Vashti (Mashti), Parti being daughter 
of TariSa. The author, a member of the (French) Institute, more 
interested apparently in archaeology than in theology, is as 
_ much opposed to the composite theory of Paul Haupt as he 
is to the Persian theory of de Goeje or the Elamite- Babylonian 
. theory of Jensen. 


ee ne 


74 


= 












3 












1 Herodotus, iii. 27 ff. 

2 See reference in note 10 on p. 361. 
3 Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol. xxiii, Thousand and One 
7 Nights. 


‘ 











_ Aaron, chief priest, r14. - 
- Aaronites, 17, 61. 
: Ab (Abib), or fifth month, 116. 
_ Abassaros, 47: 
* Abominations,’ used of mixed 
Marriages, 135, 141. 
"Abrahams, Israel, 304. 
_ Accad, 39, 42. 
Access to the king, 332. 
- Amcsall Hebrew 6 intro- 
_ ducing, 174, 351. 
‘ _ Achaemenes, 39. 
_Acmetha = = Ecbatana, ror, 103. 
_ Adar, month of, 109, 327. 
“Adonai = Lord, 20. 
_ Adonikam, 57. 
Adverbial clause; 351. 
_ Adversaries, 194. 
N Adversary and enemy, 343. 
 Actiological myths, 353- 


- Agagite, 324. 
Ahasuerus, or Xerxes, 85, 306. 


_ Ahava, River, 6, 124, 128. 
“Ahura mazda, I5, 40, 102, I2i. 


, 58. 
Alexander, Archibald, 8. 
Alexander the Great, 19. 





Amenophis HI, King of Egypt, 

PY: .r02> 

eee Journal of Semitic 
et 14. 

PAmtextris, O 

_Ananiah (Beit He Hannina), 262. 

Eiiathoth, 57- 


perarces, 120. 
‘Another portion,’ 183, 187. 


oe ~ INDEX 


Anthropomorphism, 235. 

Antilegomena, 292. 

Antiochus III, conquest of 
Palestine by, 34 


seine —IV _(Epiphanes), 

Antiphonal singing in oie 
music, 79. 

Antonia, 169. 


Aparsathchites, Arphasites, 88, 
97; 105. 

Apis, the sacred bull, 362, —. 

Apocryphal Additions to Es- 
ther, 294. 

Apollo, priests of, 15, 121. 

— worship of, roe. 

Apothecaries = mixers, 183. 

Arabian Nights, 319- 

Arabic, 314. 

Aramaic, as language of diplo- 
matic letters, 13, 168. 

— documents, 12, 16, 23, 81. 

— language, 13, 109, 314. 

— Papyri, 6, 13, 14, 85, 102, 
132, 146. 

Archaeology, Proceedings of 
Society of, 13, 28, 29, 71. 

Archevites, 88. 

Archives, kept in many capi- 
tals, 103. 

Arise = set about, 145. 

Armenia, 94. 

Armoury, 187. 

Artaxerxes I (Longimanus), de- 
cree of, rI7. 

—as King of Babylon, 100, 
1r2. 

Artaxerxes I] (Mnemon), -26, 
33, 114, 116, 165. 


~ 





Artaxerxes III (Ochus), 34, 165. 


Article, definite for our in- 
definite, 332. 

Aryan, 39. 

Asaph, 168. 

Asaphites, 63. 

Ascent of the Corner, ror. 

Ashamed, Heb. verbs for, 138. 

Ashes, 330. 

Ashurbanipal, 83. 

Assembly, of the Gods, 302. 


Asses, 69. i 

Assyria, 82, 91, 94, 113, 169. 

Assyrian, 314. 

Astonied = dumbfoundered, 
136, 137. 

Athanasius, 292. 

Atonement, Day of, 10, 71, 
218, 225. 


—to make: Heb.‘to cover,’ 249. 
Avesta, the, 362. 

Azgad, 57. 

Azmaveth, 58. 


Baba Bathra, 3. 

Babylon, 4, 5, 6, 11, 22, 24, 
26, 31, 42, 43,46, 51,55, OF, 
81, 82, 91, 92, 94, IOI, ITZ, 
160, 169, 202, 254. 

— conquest of, 32. 

— route taken on departure 
from, 50, 116, 169. 

Babylonian contracts, 96, 244. 

— months, 152, 160. 

— tablets, 96, 103, 168. 

— Talmud, 3. 

— unlucky days, 235. 

Baentsch, 128. 

- Baer, 174. 

Bagohi (Bagoas), 40, 204. 

Balawat, The Bronse Gates of, 
108, 

Bani, house of, 154. 

Banishment = 
tion, 'r22, 

Baris, 161, 169. 

Bars, 180. 


excommunica- — 


Baudissin, 3, "13, 61, 64, 

114, 133, 242, 299-8: 

“i used as instrument for 
punishment, 107, 


Beard, plucking off of as sign 
of sorrow, 136. = (= 
Bedouins, 19935 » Simos 


Beer. 5 Dra TSA 
Behistun Inscriptions, 141, 923, 
360, 361. invitARyr 

Beiroth, 5&0 © 1 22 
Beit Jibrin, 261. Oh ete waGh 
Beat Nettef, 57. » e-bay 
Bel, 40, 42. : 
Benjamin and Vestahyah 45.47 
Benjamitesy-45).95h! aad 


Ben-Sira, 22. 

Benzinger, 136, 199, 248. 

Berit, 244. 

Berosus, 40. Tod 1 

Bertheau, 2I, 50, 545 705 99, 
106, 152, 156, 157, 170, 182, 
195, 205, 221, 283, 286. 

Bertheau-Ryssel, 90, 155, 255, 
300, 324, 351, 357- “uh Tae 

Bertholet, 13, 4°, 43, 44, 
5°, 60, 66, 70, 73, 87, 90, 955 
98, 101, Lo2, 103, 104, 105, 
106, 109, [10, III, 119, 121, 
126, 128, 130, 133, 136, 143,;- 
167, 170, 173, 182, 189, 190, 
194, 195, 227, 240, 242, 248, 
249, 250, 254, 255, 265, 206, 
267, 271, 276, 277, ars bate 
322, 361. 

Bethel, 58. 

Beth essentiae, 195. 

Beth-zur, 186. 

Beyond the petit: 
tamia, 87. ; 


“Bible, Hebrew, 3, is 


— English, 3. 
— Welsh, 3. © 
— Old Tétoneli 6, 8, : a5. * 
Bigtha, 322. 


peivthen, 322. 

Bigthana, 322. - 

Birket-el-Hamyra, 134, 185. 

Birket-es-Silwan, 185. 

Bissel, 29. 

Bliss, Dr., 173, 177- 

‘Blush = to be distressed, 138. 

Bohlenius, qo. 

Bolts, 180. 

Book, 313, 358. 

.— of ‘thé law of Moses, 219. 

Books, binding of, 157, 222. 

Booths, 226. 

Borrowing and lending, 198. 

Boswellia, a tree, 279. 

Bowing down as sign of rever- 

i ence, 324. 

Bows, 195. 

Brereton, 294. 

Briggs, C., go. 

Broad place, 148. 

Broad wall, 183. 

Brook, or Wady, 175. 

bBudde, to (n.), 13, 54, 
242, 361. 

Buhl, Franz, 26, 170, 308. 

Build = rebuild, q2, 167, 208, 
* 214. 

- Bullinger, 336. 

Burnt offerings, see Offerings. 

Butler, 165. 


220, 


a 





Callistus, Nicephorus, 292. 
Cambridge Bible, 161. 
Sees 15, 16, 39, 83, 109. 
— conquest of Egy pt, 32, 362. 
Camels, 69. ~ 
‘Canaanites, 135, 232. 
Canon, Jewish, 3. 
Canticles, 291. 
Capital punishment, among As- 
bc _ Syrians, 108, 
— — Hebrews, 108. 
— — Persians, 107. 
foie, children of, 55, 82. 
Carchemish, 50, 116, ‘169. 
peerings, Council of, 292, 










ee pies 5 ee SIN DES 


367 - 


Cassel, D., 341. © 

Castle, 169. 

Cell, 130, 190. 

Centuxy Bible, 31, 32, 43, 56, 79; 
94, 106, 116, I22, I4I, 173,- 
189, 192, 208, 252, 208, 323. 

Chaldeans, 99. 

— language of, 99. 

Chamber, great, 279. 

Chamberlains = eunuchs, 310, 
315, 320. 

Chambers, 130, 190. 

Chancellor = counsellor, 87, 92. 

aye de la Saussaye, 361 
(a 

Chargers = libation cups, 48. 

Chemosh, rer. 

Chephizah, 58. 

Cheyne, 15(n.), 21, 23, 28, 30, 
31, 32, 40, 48, 81 

Chief priest, 114. 

Chigi, 28. 

Children of, meaning of phrase, 
63. 

Chisianus Codex, 28. 

Chislev (Kislew), 
month, 147, 160. 

Choaspes (a river), 161. 

Chronicler, 4, 14, 16, 40, 41, 
54, 81, 109, II2, 177, 254, 
258, 267. 

Chronicles, Book of, 323, 358. 

Chronology, comparative table 
of, 32. 

Cicero, birth of, 34. 

Circumstantial clause, 351. 

Cities, meaning of Hebrew 
word for, 149. 

City records, 15. 

— walls, repairing of, 84. 

Clans, lay, 124. 

— local, 53- 

-— personal, 52. 

Clericus, 304. 

Coats of mail, 196. 

Codes, Deuteronomic Code, 10, 
18, 22, 23, 129, 137, 231, 277+ © 


or ninth 


ae hee 2) 


Codes, Ezekiel’s Code, 9. 
— Hammurabi Code, g(n.), 199. 
— Holiness Code, ro. 


_— Priestly Code, 9, 10, 20, 22, 


33, III, 113, 129, 161, 218, 
279. 
Codomannus, see Darius III. 
Commandments, 163. 
Commission appointed re mixed 
marriages, 144, 157. 
Commission of Artaxerxes I to 
Nehemiah, 168. 
Commissions of Artaxérxes I to 
Ezra, 117, 132. 
Condamin, 344. 
Confession of Ezra, 137, 157. 
Confession, to make = to praise, 
to give thanks, Hebrew word 
for, 137, 143, 148. 
Congregation, 68, 144, 220. 
Continual = daily, 74. 
» Cook, Stanley, 199. 
Corin (measures), 120. 
Corner Gate, 181. 
Cornill, 9, 13, 133. 
Cosmetics, 315, 319. ; 
Cosquin, 363. * 
Couches, 309. 
Counsellors, see Chancellors. 
-— Seven, 118. 
Couriers, 329. 
Cousinship of Mordecai and 
Esther, 316, 317. 
Covenant, sure, 244. 
Covering of head as sign of 
grief, 341. 
Craftsmen, Valley of, 262. 
Crown, 311. 
Crowned horses, 340. 
Crucifixion, 108. 
Cunaxa, battle of, 33. 
Cuneiform inscriptions, 40, 96, 
360, 
Cupbearer, 165. 
Curse, 246. 
Custom (tax), go. 
Cuthaean, 179. 


 Daric, "derivation of the we, 













— clay cylinder of, 14, 
— edict of, 40, ror, 138. 
— policy of tolera on of, 40, 

362. - ; 


— Zoroastrian i in religion 360. 


Damascus, 169, 
Damasias, 167. ee oe 
Daniel, 123.. ~~ A 


72; 130. 
Daric and Darius, qo. ~ 
Dariku, jo. 
Darius I (iyaanpi). tenateal 
Zoroastrian, 
— called King of Assyria, 100, 
112, 
— inserted for name Cyne: 50. 
— tolerance of, 13,102, 360, 
362. 

Darius I] (Nothus), 33. _ 
Darius III (Codomannus), 20, 
34- Seedy 
Dates, compet a tes 32 ae 
Dathé, 286. rte 

Daughters = depen c 
ships, 164." 7 -seaueee 
David, 92, 109. a i 
—as originator of Temple 
music, &¢., 1S 

— city of, 185. 

— sepulchre of, 186, ; 
Davies, T. Witton, seas, 

268, 292, 323, 333, 358: 

Day, length of, 197. 
Days, unlucky, ; 235. : 
Debts, 248. ink tee x 
Decree of Crea a, 138. 












ak i 






PDécrec of Darius referring to 

_ rebuilding of Temple, ror. 

Dedication, Feast of, 10g. 

v= — of Temple, too. 

-— of wall of Jerusalem, 268, 

Dehaites, 88. 

eissmann, 28, 306. 

‘Delitzsch, Franz, 8, 26. 

— Friedrich, 47, 87. 90, 104, 

> 249. 

Deliver, to, 333. 

Deuteronomic legislation, 61, 
II5, 135. See under Codes. 

_D Devoted, ofcities, property, &c., 

e144. 

: 

+ 

= 





4 
-. 


_ Dibon (Dimonah), 261. 
Dillmann, 128, 226, 248, 251. 
_ Dinaites, 88. 





4 District, ‘Hebrew word for, 183, 
a 187. 
_ Divorce, of foreign wives, 25, 
1I2. 
Documents used in Ezra, see 
Sources. 


E Door = leaf of parchment book, - 


_ -157- 
_—= threshold, 322. 
— of city gate, 180, 206. 
_— of Temple, 209. 
‘Dough; 251. 
- Doughty, C. M., 199. 
 Dragon’s Well, 173. 
Driv offering, 74, 106, 137. 
iveg, 13, 31, 61, 67, 94, 133, 
248 » 252, es 








P Datta, 3I, 81. 

_ Duncker, 169 (n.). 

_ Dung Gate, 173, 270. 
EPyrel, 363. - 


E East, Hebrew terms for, 271. 
-— Gate, 190. 
a _ Ecbatana, rol. 
Ecclesiastes, 292.. 
_ Edfu, Egyptian ou St at, Loz. 


es toby 


<2 


pe ag 


ae 


Sa Dee 
oe 


wy 
*\ 
Siri? 


INDEX 


369 
Edomites in S. Palestine (?), 53, 


73- 
Egirtu, 87. 
Egypt, 15, 169. 
— conquest of, g2. 
— revolt of, 32. 
Elam, Elamite, 39. - 
Elders, 147. 
Elephantiné, temple at, 32. 
— appeal of Jews at, 33. 
Eliashib, 17, 19, 178, 279. 
Elul, or sixth month, 210, 266. 
el Wad, 173. 
Encyclopaedia Brblica, 17%. 


Enemy = robbers in general, 
128, 131, 196. See Adver- 
sary. 


Ephraim Gate, 177, 227, 273- 
Episcopos, 315. 
Erbt, 304. 
ru, 9. 
Esar-haddon, 83. 
Esdras I, 27, 127, ef passim. 
Esther, Queen, 293, 299. 
— age of, 297. 
— conceals her nationality, 318. 
— cousin of Mordecai, 316, 317. 
— cruelty of, 293, 352. 
— Judaism of, 318. 
— origin of name, 302. 
— petition of, 335, 342, 352. 
Esther, Book of, abstract of 
contents of, 295. 
— — aim and character of, a96. 
— — date and authorship of, 299. 
— — name of, 291. 
— — place in Canon of, 291. 
— — unity and integrity of, 298. 
Ethiopia, 207. 
Eunuchs, Rey. V. : 
lains’, 310. 
Euphrates, 87, 169. 
Euting, 173. 
Evening oblation, 137. 
Ewald, 19, 20, 29, 48, 50, 73, 
168, 211, 242, 265, 267, 293, 
361. : 


‘ chamber- 


37° 


-Excommunication, 122. 

Exiles returned under Zerub- 
babel, 23, 44. 

— — list of, 50. 

— — Ezra; 122. 

— extent of area occupied by, 
147, 254, 256, 260. 

Expositor, 235 . 

Expressed = ticked off, 128. 

Ezra, arrival at Jerusalem of, 
TI3, 133, 157- 

— commission to, 117. 

— confession of, 137, 157. 

— conspectus of chief events in 
the life of, 157- 

— death of, 158. 

— doxology of, 122. 

— genealogy of, 114. 

Ezra = help, 114. 


Farwardigan, 303. 

Fasting, as sign of mourning, 
128, 146, 331. 

— before a journey, 128. 

— includes prayer, 334. 

Fathers’ houses, heads of, 45. 

Feast (banquet), lit. ‘drinking 
meal,’ 307. 

— of Dedication of Temple, 
‘109. 

— — New Moons, 75. 

— — Passover, 5, 10, III. 

— — Passover and Unleavened 
Bread, 111. 

— — Pentecost, ro. 

— — Tabernacles,5,7, 10, 16,71, 
73: 75) 1331 156,158, 218, 225. 

Weeks, 10, 75: 

Feasts, observance of resumed 
after the return, 111. 

— original character of, 73. 

Fire offering, 104. 

Firstborn sons, traces of prac- 

tice of sacrificing, 251. 

Firstborn of animals, 251. 

Firstfruits, 250. 

Fish Gate, 180. 


EZRA, NEHEMLEEIN ; “AND. 


Gadatas inscription, , Toa, 





- Rea. 7 fe A ae es 
py ae ot: ec 
rake “ahs oom 
OOD eh ot The 
j Te eS cae 
Flesh nem being, 200, | 
For = on behalf of, r49 Eien : 
Forest of the king, 168. 


Fountain Gate, 114 27m sy 
Fox, 192. v3 
Frankincense, 279. ve? 
Frazer, John, 302, 304. 
Freewill offerings, 75. 
Fritsche, 29. sw 






Gadatas, 15, To2. 


117, 121, 360; 
Gall, 173. 


Gallows, 338. 

Gap between Ezra and Nehe- 
miah, 159. z 

Garments, rending of, as sign 
of grief, 136. i 

Gashmu, 176. 

Gates: Corner Gate, 181. 

— Dung Gate, 173, 270. © 

— East Gate, roo. . 

— Ephraim Gate, 177, 227, 273. 

— Fish Gate, 180. 

— Fountain Gate, 174, 270. 

— Golden Gate, igo. 

—_ Hammiphkad, Gate of, ror. 

— Horse Gate, 189. 

— King’s Gate, 322, 341. 

— Old Gate, 181, 24 

— Sheep Gate, 179, 189. 

— Valley Gate, 172,, = 270. 

Gates, doors in, 

— keepers of, 63. — 

— structure of, 206, me 

Geba, 58. 

Geissler, 10, 23, 277- 

Genealogies, see Lists. 

Genitive, objective, 224, 350. 

Ger, 229. 

Gerizim, temple on, 179, 287. 

Gershom, 123. ; 

Gerund, 44. 

Gesenius, 67, 70, 250, 286. 

Ghetto, 44. 

Gibbar, 57:3 nee ee 






Eibeaaties, be 
Gifts = freewill offerings, 15> 


3 "gai. 
2 ors LYieEnes Spring), 185, 


x Gilgened legend, 303. 

i 

- Ginsburg, 28, 29, 174. 

_ Gittaim, 262. 

a God, favour of displayed, z40. 
— of Heaven, 41, 107. 

_— — Jerusalem, rio. 

_ —-— our Fathers, 122. 
 Goeje, de, 363. 
Gola, 24. 

_ Golden Gate, 190. 

- Goldsmiths, 182, 191. 

_ Good day = festal day, 349. - 

4 Goods = wealth, possessions, 

a 


“ 


106. - 
_ Gordon, A. R., 235. 
_ Gracchus, Caius, Roman Tri- 
bune, 34. 
Grace = favour, 138. 
Graetz, 14, 54, 84, lor, 304. 
Graf, 6r. 
Gray, G. B., t10, 224, 251 
' Great Synagogue, 8, 220. 
Greek, 306, 314. 
— Hellenistic, 306. 
Green, W. H., 8. 
_ Grief, signs of, 136. 
_ Grote, 327. 
_ Grotius, 198. 
Guard Court, 188. 
Guilt offering, 153. 
_ Gunkel, 361. 
Guthe, 40, 43, 44, 48, 58, 104, 
__-: 130, 173, 174, 177; 190, 193, 
195, 198, 240, 265, 266, 271, 
_ _ 273, 280, 287, 361. 
Guthe-Batten, 36, 282. 


_ Gwyn, Dr., 29. - 


“Hacaliah, read Khakkeleyah, 
160. 

a ‘Hadassah, or Esther, 303, 317: 
| Haggai, 5, 23, 94. 









— INDEX 


Hagiographa, 3. 
— longest verse in the, 347. 
Hair, plucking out of, as sign of 


sorrow, 136. 
Haircloth, see Sackcloth. 
Hakkepharim, 206, 207. 
Halévy, 25. 


Hallelujah, meaning of, 79. 
Haman, an Amalekite, 298, 324. 


— cruelty of, 293. 


— derivation of name, 303. 
— impaled with his sons (?), 299. 
— made Grand Vizier, 323. 
— property of. confiscated, 345. 
Haman’s sons, names of, vari- 


ously given, 351. 


Hammeah, Tower of, 179. 


Hammedatha, 324. 
Hammer, Von, 303. 


Hammiphkad, Gate of, 191. 
Hammurabi Code, 9 (n.), I99. 


Hananel, Tower of, 180. 
Hanan, 282. 

Hanani, 212. 

Hananiah, 212. 


Haud of our God, 128, 131. 
Hang (see Impale), 107, 323. 
Hannibal, treaty of Philip with, 


34- 

Haplography, 308. 
Harim, 59, 60, 263. 
Harsith Gate, 173. 
Harvey, Lord A. J., 54. 
Harvey-Jellie, 173. 


Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, 


252. 


— Small Dictionary of the Bible, 


201. 


Haupt, 9 (n.), 97, 104, 214, 236, 


302, 304, 322, 323. 
Havernick, 296. 


“Hazor, 262. 
Head ‘covered, a sign of grief, 


341. 
Heart, 208. 
— sorrow of, 166. 
Heathen, 201. 


372 


‘Heave offering, 252, 275. 
Heaven, God of, 41, 107. 
— of Heavens, 2,31. 


Heavens, four quarters of, 271. 


Hebrew Bible, 3. 
— language, 314. 
— Old Testament, 8. 
— Rabbinical, 8. 

— of Palestine in Ezra’s time, 
223, 285. 
Hebron, 261. 
Hegai, 315. © 

Hengstenberg. 8, 67. 

Herodotus, 307, 332. 

— and Aeschylus, 32. 

Herzfeld, 29, 279. 

Hexapla, Origen’s, 3, 28. 

Hexateuch, 8, ro, 11. 

— publications of, 33. 

Hezekiah, 39. 

High priesthood, 53, 59, 114. 
See Priests, chief, 

Hinnom, Valley of, 172, 173. 

Hiphil, Inner, 220. 

Hiram, King of Tyre, ro. 

Historicity of Book-of Esther 
improbable, 297. 

Hittites, 233. 

Hitzig, 314. 

Hodaviah, 63. 

Holzinger, 128. 

Hommel, 304. 

Hoonacker, v., 13, 21, 25, 26, 
47, 84, 116, 126, 151. 

Horeb, 293. 

Horonite, 170, 178. 

Horse Gate, 189. 

Horses, 69. 

— crowned, 340. 

House = subdivision of Jewish 
clan, 44, 65. 

— = treasure house of his God, 
46. 

— of the mighty men, 186, 

— — — women, 315. 

Howorth, Sir Henry H., 13, 
21, 28, 29, 71, 361. 


- 


_ Humiliation, 1; 
- Humman, 303. 


‘ 


EZRA, NEHEMIAH, “AN ie 





Hupfeld, 257. 
Hystaspis, see ieee ek 
Hyde, Thomas, 303. ~ he 
Hyrcanus, John, hs A “ 


Ibn Ezra, 49. 
Iddo, 126, 


‘Tegereth, 87. 
Imbert, 25, 47. 
Immer, 60. ~ 
Impale, Tegal 107, 323. 
Impersonal verb, seé~ 
subject. ea 
Inaros, revolt of, 32. — ¢ 
Indefinite subject, arise 103, 152, 
213, 229, 267, 3135, 326, 357- 
India, 307. 
Infinitive absolute, son ‘ 
Inscriptions, Persian, 39, 314, 
60 4 





— trilingual, 314. 
Interest, 199, 
Interpreter, 292. Tat ell 
Isles of the sea, 358.0 
Israel, 24, 26, 315 71, 109, IT2.’ 
— rebellion and> “punishment 
of, 138. 
— meaning whole community, 
24, 26, 31, 144. ; 
— — laity, 109, 145, 153) 256. 
Ishtar, 302, 303. Yrs 
— legend, 30g... - 
Jaddua (Yaddua), rh 20; 3H 
146, 178, 264. © 
Jaffa Gate; 173. Hy 
Jahn, G., 103. 
jamnia, Synod of, apt » 292. 
Jampel, 82, ror, 102, 103; 304- 
Jannaeus, Alexander, 34. 
Jebus, Jebusites, 233. 
Jehohanan, son of Eliashib, sas. 
— chamber of,’ 146. oa 
Jehring, 336. SES eae 


- INDEX” 


aS : 

Jensen, P., 302, 303, 324, 363. 
ericho, 59, 180, 

erome, 3, 323- 

_ Jerome’s Version, 204. 
erusalem, arrival of Nehemiah 


at, 169. 














at, 278, 280. 
— capture of, 34. 
— destruction of, by Nebuchad- 
-- nezzar, 84, 91. 
_— efforts to increase population 
- of, 214. 
-— mighty kings of, 92. 
4 . 

-— population of small, 214. 
-— State of, on arrival of Ezra, 
fn E13: 
-— the Holy City, 254. 
-— walls of, see Walls. 
Jerusalem and Judah (Judah 

and Jerusalem), 55, 95, 118, 
140. 

- Jeshua (Joshua), 4, 22, 51, 56, 
; 63, 72; 75) 77; 95+ 

- Jesus and Joshua, 333. 

_ Jews, as bondmen, r39. 
— confiscation eee of, 
pe LATE } 
~ — language of, 285. 
: — modern, 3209. 
_ — music of, 78, 79. 
- — new religious community of, 
in Jerusalem, 89. 
— neighbours of, 148. 
— officials of, 14. 
— remnant of, 142. 
return of, 32, 159. 
— second return of, 33. 
— separateness of, 327. 
~ Jewish Encyclopaedia, 304. 
- Joel, prophecy of, 33. 
_ Johns, C. H. W., 199, 235. 
Johnstone, 235. - 
Jonathan, made high-priest, 34. 
Jonathan, should be John, 264. 














oe 


fi 







109, 133, 146, 156, 17, 168, 


— second arrival of Nehemiah - 





Josephus, 3, 19, 28, 40, 67, 104, 


37S 


170, 179, 211, 248, 286, 300, 
3°7; 323. 

Josephus and Esdras, 28 
Judah, post-exilic inhabitants 
of, 254. See Map, p. 38. 
Judah, province of, 147, 256, 

257, 260. 
— read Hodaviah, 78. 
Judah and Benjamin, 45, 147. 
Judaism, 15, 293. 
— reorganization of, 6. 
Judge (verb), rar. 


~ Judgements, 163. 


Judges, or Shophetim, 150. 
Julius Caesar, birth of, 34. 
Justi, Ferdinand, tor. 


Kadmiel, 63. 

Kalisch, 67. 

Kamphausen, 299. 

Kassite tablets, 363. 

Kaulen, 295. 

Kautzsch, 90, 197, 267, 295. 

Keil, 8, 20, 29, 49, 54, 76, 106, 
156, 157, 173, 254, 255, 296. 

Keilah, 186. 

Keltic, 332. 

Kent, 5, 14, 21,84, IOI, 104, 105, 
III, 133, 177, 195, 273; 325- 

Kenushata, 271. 

Keitubim, 3, 291. 

Khanukah, ito, 268. 

Kidron,. 175. 

Kikkar, 269. 

King, business of, 328. 

— forest of, 168. 

— gardens of, 174. 

— house of, 105. 

— gate of, 322, 341. 

— how to be approached, 332. 


‘ 


- — pool of, 174. 


— treasure house of, 105> 


| King of Persia, of Cyrus, 19) 410 


Kiriath-arba, 261. 
Kiriath-arim, 58. 
Kivisha, 337- 
Kirkpatrick, 18, 


\ 374 EZRA, 


Kislew  (Chislev), 
month, 147, 160, 268. 

Kittel, 73. 

Klostermann, to, 18, 21, 48, 
84, 95, 133, 220, 226, 300. 

-Kénig, 133, 299. 

Korahites, 62. 

Kosher (Kasher), 346. 

Kosters, 21, 23, 25, 26, 40,47, 
48, 54, 84, 91, oT, 116, 133, 
136, 140, 162, 226, 220, 242, 
247, 275, 277: + 

Koyunjik, or Nineveh, too, 103. 

Ktesias, 91, 103, 165, 167, 359. 

Kuenen, ro, 18, 21, 48, 84, 89, 
95, 133, 220, 226, 300, 361. 

Kuthaean, 179. See Cuthaean. 


Lagarde, 302, 303, 304. 
Lamentations, 292. 

Land, of captivity, 192. 

— unclean, 140. 
-Lands = heathen lands, 138. 
Langen, 295. 

Lap, 203. 

Law, as to drinking, 310. 

— reading of the, 156, 158. 

— of Moses, &c., in Ezra and 

Nehemiah, 9, 72, 115. 

—_-—— Book of the, 2To. 
Laymen, 7r. 

Lee, 286. 

Lehmann, 361, 362. 

Lending and borrowing, 198. 
Letters = dispatches, 86, 87, 


207,313, 358. 

— of complaint sent to Per- 
sian Court, 84. f 

Levi, 60. 


Levita, Elias, 220. 

Levites, absence of, among re= 
turned exiles, 126. 

— as musicians, &c., 62, 78, 
258. 

. — course§ of, r1o. 

— fewness of, among returned 
exiles, 61, 126, 


or ninth 


NEHEMIAH, AN 


rs = prosperity, 349. 


miah discussed, 52,0 
Lists, genealogical, 54> 214, 
254. cf es %\ 


Little ones, Hebrew word 


sometimes ae wives, 


List of names in Ezra @and Nehe- : 








128. a eant ‘ 


- 


Lod, or Lydda, 59. ie a 42 


Lod and Ono, 59. ees ad 


Lohr, 69,°182;.273085 ¢ ae 
Longimanus, see pew Te 
Lorp (Yahweh), 162. — 
Lot, division by, 326. 
Lots, see Purim, — Ness 
Lucky and unlucky days, 235- 
Luther, 293. = 
Lydians, 309. get 


Maccabaean uprising, 26, 345 


297+ 

Maccabaeus, Judas, victory over 

Nicanor, 302.° _ 
Macedonian war, first, 34. 
Madden, 7o. 
Magistrates and judges, ra. 
pegs 14, 102, . 
Malachi, 8, 31. 


Tr 


Malachi and Isaiah, composi. | 


. oon 


>< 


tion of, 33. 
Man, Hebrew ‘Ata = human | 
being, 171. AP ga 
Manna, 236. nail 


Manasseh, Prayer of, 291. ah 
Manasses, son of Jaddua, 179. 
Mantle, rending of as sign of 
grief, 136. ; 
Marathon, battle of, weak 
Marble, 309. be RE 


£4 By 


Marduk (Merodak), 14, 40, 42, 


46, 98, 302 398s te Ee 


_ 


ee 
“ 


ee ete ee 
Pa ~ .* Eee, 






r 
4 

e 

: 

4 

‘ 

; 





F 
4 
7 


pi 


be 
, 


- Marquart, 36, 81, 101, 102, 103, 


' 120, 162, 277, 289. 
Marry, Hebrew word means ‘to 
give a home to,’ 144. 


é Marti, Karl, 19, 32, 81, roq. 


i 


_ Masons and, in Hebrew, stone- 


cutters, 76. 

Massacre of non-Jews by Jews, 
350, 352. 

Massorah, 3. 

_ Massorites, 72. 

 Mazdaism, 360. 
azdaist, 42, 121. 


McCurdy, 361. 
_ Meal (cereal) offering, 9, 1 


74, 106, 137, 247, 279. 
Measure of wheat, 120. 
Meat (flesh offering), 137. 
Mecca, 138. 


- Meconah (Mekenna), 261. 


Medes, 39. 


| Media, 94. 


. 


Medo-Persian kingdom, 308. 
Megabysus, revolt of, 33. 
Megillah, 291. 


_ Megilloth, 2or. 


Mehanem, King of Israel, 92. 
Meinhold, 235, 270. 


_ Meissner, 87, 96, 303. 


Melito, Bishop of Sardis, 292. 


_ Memoirs of Nehemiah, 7. 


Memorial, 177. 


- Menti, 87. 
_ Merchants, 19a, 191. 


Mercy, 122, 165. 


- Meremoth, 181. 


Merrill, Selah, 172. 


_ Meshullam, 181, 190, 221. 


_ Mesopotamia, 87. 
_ Messiah, expectation of, 94. 
i Meyer, Hy 13,299475 48, 51, 66, 


‘ 


68, 70, 80, 81, 87, 91, 94, 97, 
to2(n.), III, 116, 121,132,136, 


. 169, 169 (n.), 182, 185, 246, 


254, 255, 272, 275, 278, 361. 


Michaelis, J. D., 68, 156, 227, 
| 2991 302, 304, 354+ 


INDEX © 


(375 


| Michaelis, J. H. » 67 

Michmas, 58. 

Ministers, 127. 

Minkhah, 9, 18, 74, 106, 137, 
247, 279. 

Mishnah, 4, 220. 

Mitchell, 173. 

Mithredath, 
cial, 86. 

— treasurer to Cyrus, 47, 85. 

Mixed marriages, 6, 18, 25, 26, 
ATs 

— commission in 
with, 144, 157. 

— Ezra’s grief at, 157. 

— means used by Ezra to end, 
133, 134- 

— protest of Nehemiah against, 
159, 285. 

—,repentance of people on 
account of, 143. 

Mizpah, district of, 185. 

— town of, 182, 186. 

Mnemon, see Artaxerxes I. 

Modern discovery, 340. 

Molek, 173. 

Mommert, 168, 169, 172. 

Months, Jewish and Baby- 
lonian, 152, 160, 

Mor, 319. 

Mordecai, age of, according to 
Book of Esther, 297, 316. 

—a Jew, 341. 

— cruelty of, 293. 

— etymology ofname, 302,316. 

— Judaism of, 318. 

—refusal to bend before 
Haman, 324. 

— relationship to Esther (317) 
concealed, 298, 318. 


subordinate _ offi- 


connexion 


-— sitting at the king’s gate, 


322, 341. 
— succeeds Haman, 345. 
Mordecai and Esther, edict “af 

357: 

Morgan, de, 39. © 
Mortgage of lands, 200. 


376 


_ Moses, five books of, rr. 
— Law of, 115, 219, 226. 
‘Most holy things,’ 67. 
Moulton, J. H., 28, 306. 
Mourning, acts of, 331. 
— signs of, 136. 

Mihlau, 186, 

Mules, 69. 

Myrrh, 319. 


om 


Nabonidus, 39, 42: 

Nabonidus - Cyrus 
360. 

Nabopolassar, King of Babylon, 


99. 
Nabunaid, 14. 

Nahamani, 55. 

Nail, rgo. 

Name, significance of, 164. 
Nations = heathen, 207. 
Nazianzen, Gregory, 292. 

- Neanias, 144. ~ 

Nebo, the God, 40, 42. 

— a town, 58. 

Nebuchadnezzar, 5, 46, 84, 91, 


92. 

— spelling of name, 55, 99, 317. 

Nehemiah, a Jerusalemite, 166. 

— arrival in Jerusalem, 169. 

— second arrival in Jerusalem, 
278, 280. 

— confession and prayer, 162. 

— inspection of walls of Jeru- 
salem, 172. 

— meaning of name, 160. 

— memoirs of, 7. 

— protest against mixed mar- 
Tiages, 159, 285. 

—route taken by to Jeru- 
salem, 169, 

Nekoda, 65. 

Nestle, 28, 29. 

Nethinim, in* Temple, 62, 63, 
64, 71, I2I, 127, Igo. 

Netophah, 57, 269. 

New Moons, Feast of, 75. 

— Year, 152. 


EZRA, NEHEMIAH, a 


Chronicle, 


Noadiah, the Zeman ara 


— son of Binnui, 13% 
Nob, 262. : 
Nobles = first men, 308, 
— = freedmen, 175. ~~ 

— = powerful ones, 181, 247. 





‘Noldeke, 14, 20, 91, 146, 302, 


328, 358, 361. 
Nominal apposition, 135. 
North, Hebrew terms for, 271. 
Now, two Hebrew. bse Me 
rendered, 163. 
Nowack, 19. 
= of those who returned, 


— of vessels restored by Cyrus, 


Numbesag significant, 51, 118, 
310; Saas 

Oath, 203. 

Objective genitive, 224, 350. 

Occasions when vessels were 
removed from Temple, 46. - 

Ochus, see Artaxerxes II]. ~ 


Oettli, 36, 106, 140, 276; 299, | 


3°95; 343- 

Offerings, burnt, 72, “1 Th 
106, 132, 137. ss 

— drink, 74, 106, 137. = 

— fire, ro4. ; 

— freewill, 75. 

— guilt, 153. 

— heave, 252, 275. ° 

— meal, or minkhah, 9, 18, vd 
106, 137, 247, 279: 

— meat (flesh), 137, 

— sin, II0, 732, 249, 

— wood, 250, 

Officer, 315. P 

Old Gate, 1r8re rte, 


4 


a, he 







‘Olive branches, 226. 
Onias, appointment of as high 
__ Priest, 34.~ 


~ dom, see Persian kingdom. 

4 Onientalische Studien, 333, 358. 
Origen, 3. — 

-Origen’s Joga 28, - 

Orr, 304 (n.). B, 
‘Osnappar, 88, 

- Outward Court, 339. 

_ Overseer, 259, 315. 


 Padaly. = redeemed, 164. 

_ Pahath-Moab, 56. 

Palace, or fortress, 161, 307. 
_ Palace, inner court of, 335. 


By 


= outer court of, 339. 
[ Palestine; 14, 96. 
a 


“—as bridge between Egypt 
and Babylon, t1o2. 
a _ — condition of on arrival of 
Ezra, 11g. 
 — conquered by Antiochus III, 


 _ 34- 

a Papyti, Aramaic, 6, 13, 14, 

» 32 (n.); 33 (n.), 40.(n.), 42, 

85, 88, 96, 102, 103, 107, 132, 
146, 161, 170, 177, 204, 209. 

Paradise, 168. 

Parchment roll, leaves of mixed, 

157: 

Parti, 363. 

 Partia, 94. 

Participle passive, used adver- 

bially, 92. 

ee IoT, 

_ Pashhur, 60 

Passover, 5. 

; apes, L. B., 172, 292, 299, 300, 
~ B04, 322, 323; 324, 325, 326, 

~~ 327; 330; 351+ 

Paulus of Tella, 28. 






. 
: 
-? 
“a 
4 
= 
~ 
: 
; 
4 
s 
f 





Re ns OA ae INDE. 





377 


Pavement, 399. “ 
Payment of workmen in money, 
75: 


Peace, incorrect translation of 


Hebrew term of greeting, 97, 
359- : : 

Pedaiah, 282. 

Pekhah (Ass.) Pakhat, 132, 169. 

Peloponnesian War, 33. 

Pentateuch, 8. 

Pentecost, to. 

People = laity, 125. 

Peoples of the lands = heathen ~ 

in general, 73, 83, 136. 

Perfumes, 315, 319. 

Persepolis, ror. 

Persia, conqueror of, 34. 

— kings of, rqo. 

— Officials of, 5, 26. 

— monuments of, 39, 360. 

— supremacy of, I9, 

Persian exchequer, money in, 
120. 

— kingdom, organization of, 
87, 132, 307, 328. 

— — end of, 34. 

Persians, heavy drinkers, 310. 

Peters, 245 (n.). 

Petrie, F., 196. 

Petition of Esther, 335, 342,352. ~ 

Phoenicia, 169. 

Pinches, 235, 360 (a.), ), 361. 

Pisistratus, 32. 


-Place = Jewish quarter, 43, 


Plain, meaning of Hebrew word 
so translated, 187, 269. 

Plainly (distinctly), 92. 

a and Mycale, battle an 


Plural of intensity, 148, 95+ 

Plutarch, 340. 

Pohlmann, 28. 

Poll tax, 9, 248. 

Polyglot, of Walton, 28. . 

Poor, suffering and complaint 
of in Jerusalem in time of 
Nehemiah, 198, 


‘ 
\ 


378 EZRA, NEHEMIAH, AN 


Population of Jerusalem small, 
214. 

Porters, in Temple, 62, 63, 71, 
153, 212. 

Portions, or diet, for maidens, 
318. 

Postal service in time of Xerxes, 
313. 

‘ Post-haste,’ 329. 

Posts = ‘runners,’ 329. 

Pound, 71. 

Praise, to, see Confession. 

Prayer, spreading out of hands 
during, 138. 

Precious things, 46. 

Priest, chief (high), 53, 59, 114, 
178. 

— absence of at reading of the 
Law, 221. 

Priests, city and country, 61. 

— dominance of in Chronicles, 
17. 

— garments of, 70, 7I. 

— laxity of, 18, 278. 

— return from exile of, 60. 

— chiefs of, leading members of 
priestly class, 129. 

Priests and Levites, 17, 18, 44, 
71, 145- 

Princes, 130, 134, 136, 147, 149. 
Proceedings of Society of Biblical 
Archaeology, 13, 28,.29; 71. 
Prophecy = to play the part of 

a prophet, 95. 
Proselytes, 246, 301, 350, 356. 
Province, 55, 307. 
Psalteries and harps, 268. 
Pseudo-Smerdis, reign of, 32,83. 
Ptolemy I (Lagos), 34. 
— Il (Philadelphus), 34. 
Pukhré, 303. 
Pukhrit, 302. 
Pulpit, 2ar. 
Punic Wars, 34. 
Pur, meaning of word, 302, 303, 
326. The 
Purah (winepress), 304. 









tes, 2 
Poriagy Feast 
30r. : a 
— institution of, 353. 
Oanah (redeemed), 20 te PG aa 
ies ah “4 citi, ’ 
oheleth (Ecclesiastes), 292. 
Queen, influence of, and deriva 

tion of Hebrew word so r r 

dered; 169) =h Sei aK: 
Quran, 199. ~ z 


Rabbi ben Lakish rs) 
Rabshakeh, 165. . oe é 
Rain, Great, 148, 5. tag Sy 
Ram as guilt offering, 153+ 
Ramah, 58. a 
Rashi, 49,174. 
Rawlinson, 20, 92, 221, 250,254, 
267, 270, 297, 316, 324, a 
327, 344, 349, 360 (n.), 363. ; 
Reading of the Law a Ezra, 
156, 158. > a 
Reclining at meals, 309.” 
Records, Babylonian, 51. 
— city (Jerusalem), 15, 152. 
— Persian, 90, 323, 339-5 
— Temple, 12, 54. eal wt? 
— of the past, 39, 360. 
Redeemed (Heb, Sera, 20%. 





aM 


— — Padah, i 

Redapaeneteel in” Nehemiah, " 
204, 206. 

Register, 66; of. Tate 

Rehoboam, King of Israel, 19. 

Rehum, 85, 86, 93, 96, 263. 

— king's answer to, 92.0 ae 

Release, 321. tin eat 

Relief, 333. = : 


Religious centralization, 39. 

Religious element, absent from 
Esther, but introduced din. the 
Greek additions, 294. rs 

Remnant, 138, 142. mee: 





Renan, 22, 30, Seeit 48, 361. 


i ae 
Pu Sa * Tho 


scaket 
< 





wo 


ee . INDE 7 379 


; Reuss, 20, 30, 40, 47, 48. Samaria, army of, 191. 
_ Revenue of Persian kingdom, | — province of, 170, 260. 
ie Qa. — Sanballat Governor of, 170, 
Review of Theology and Philo- 260. , 
 sophy, 235. — town of, 83, 89, 170. 
Right, or fixed share, 177. Samaritan officials, 92. ; 
Ring, signet, 328. — opposition to Nehemiah, 171, 
- Robinson, Dr. E., 172. 206. 
- Roll (clay tablet), 103. — party, 81, 94, 160. . 
Roman Senate, 92. _ — party, secession of, 33, 178. 
‘Romans, war with Samnites, 34. | — Temple, building of, 33. 
Roof, flat, 227. Samaritans, broadmindedness 
~ Roominess = déliverance, 333. of, 26, 81, 171, 178. 
- Rosenzweig, 20, 126. — letter of accusation against 
Route taken by Zerubbabel, &c., Jews, sent by to Artaxerxes 
50; and by Nehemiah, 169. I, 85. 
Royal apparel, 349. — would join in building the 
_— house, 105. ~ Temple, their offer refused, 80. 
Ruler (governor), 136, 175. Sanballat, the Horonite, 170, 
~ Ruth, 31, 292. ‘ 178, 206, 207. 
Ryle, 3, 13, 21, 43, 48, 50, | — the Kuthaean, 179. 


99, 116, 133, 157, 165, 167, | Sanctify = to set apart, 276. 
173, 185, 252, 255, 270, 282, | Sanabassar, 47. 
283, 292. Sanskrit, 333. 

Ryssel, 21, 50, 54, 79, 99, 133, | Sargon, 42, 82, 83, 176. . 
156, 197,242, 267, 282, 283, | Sarim, 134. 


286, 299, 308, 322, 355- Sassabassaros, 4"). 
Sassanian kings, 363. 

' Sabasare, 47. * Satan, 86. 
Sabbatic.year, ro. Satraps, 132, 328. 
Sabbath, observance of, 8, 31, | Saul, King of Israel, 19, 

159, 234. Saulcy, De, 25. 


Sachau, Aramaic Papyri, 32 | Saviours (judges), 239. 
(n.), 33 (n.), 40 (n.),; 42, 96, | Sayce, A. H., 3, 21, 39, 47, 725 


TO2, 103, 107, 146, 161, 170, 87 (n.), 88 (n.), 103, 233, 248, 
TJ], 204, 209, 362 (n.), 363. 303, 361. 
Sackcloth, 229, 330. Sayce-Cowley Papyri, 32 (n.), 
Sacrifice; as a meal, 106. 85, 88. 
Sacrifices, see Offering. - | Sceptre, golden, 333. 
Sacrificial regulations, 72. Schechter, 220. 
— system, restored after the | Scheil, R. P., 363. 
exile, 74. Schick, 173, 177. 
. Sais, 15. Schlatter, 170. 
Salamis, battle of, 3ar. Schlegel, A. W. v., 363.- 
Salt, 120. Scholz, A., 295. 


' — to eat, significance of phrase, | Schrader, 50, 81, 83, 133, 242, 
901. = s "<- 360 (n,)s 


Schule, 84, 119, 156, 283, 297. | 


Schiirer, 36, 44, 250 (n.). 
‘Schwally, 304. 
Scribe, 115, 117, 314, 328. 
Sealing. of the Covenant, 245. 
— ring, 328. 
Secretary of Sanballat (To- 
_biah?), 206, 207. 
‘Seek,’ two meanings of, 116, 
129. 
’ Seganim, 136, 175- 
Sekhikhim, 195. * 
Selalim, 195. 
Sellin, 21, 50, 85, 94. 
Semler, 297. - 
Senaah, 59. 
Separated themselves, 
who had, 112, 246. 
Sepulchre of David, 186. 
Sepulchres of Nehemiah’s an- 
cestors, 66, 
Servant, 171. 
_ Servants, i. e. Nehemiah’s suite, 
196. 
Service, 127. 
‘Seven, asacred number, 118. 
Seven counsellors, 118, grr. 
- eunuchs, 310. 
— princes, 311. 
Shaashgaz, 315, 320. 
Shahriar, 319, 363. 
Shamar, natar = to keep, 141. 
Shebaniah, 263. 
Shecaniah, 263. 
Sheep Gate, 179, 189, rgr. 
Shekel, 9, 129. 
Shelah, Pool of, 185. 
Shelemiah, 282. 
Shemaiah, 209. 
Shenazzar, 47.. 
Sheshbazzar, Prince over Judah, 
475 55, 56, 105, 156. 
—not identical with Zerub- 
babel, 47, Loo. 
Shethar-bozenai, 96. 
Shew, i.e. report to, 318. 
Shewbread, 248. 


those 




















Shut up, 209. © 
Siegfried, 13, 48, 
105, 106, 107, IQ, 
193, 195, 206, 21 
230, 254) 260, | 
359, 359: ; 
Signet ring, 328. 
Silence of 


prince, 345" se hs Sheds Sia 
Sin offering, x10, 132, 249. 


Sinai, Mt., 233. 3 
Singers, included in Levies Be: 
78, 258. Ein act 


— not included in Levites, ad ; 
63, 71 : 9 
Singing men — 
women, 69. _ 
Sira, Ben, 22. . 
Siris, 337: . 
Sisinnes, 96. | Fe Ps 
Sitnah, Hebrew word = accuse: 


tion, 86. 
Sivan, or third month, Bo 
Skinner, J., 2To. ay ae 
Sleeplessness of ise Ae lies, lo. 
Smend, Rudolph, 52, 60, 61, 
133, 246, 255. 
Smith, G. A., 134, 247) 170, 171, 
172, 178) 473 (ny 171, 189, ’ 


—H. P., ate Ho ee ee 
— W. Robersars 19, 178, 210, 
277; 353 (M.), Aas 
Sojourners, 239, 3= oe aa 
Solidarity of nati 
Solomon, 153 


‘€ atau 


. » 





‘2 


- 


% 


A 


: 
: 
z 


. 
: 


Solomon, height of porch in 
Temple of, 104. 
— servants of, 64. 
Son = descendant, 316. 
-— = grandson of, 94. 
— = having the property of, 
» 63, 82, 
— = one or more ofa specified 
class, 269. 
Sources of Ezra and Nehemiah, 
ar, 
South, Hebrew terms for, 271. 
Southern Kingdom, 45. 


_ Spears, 195. = 


Spencer, 67. 

Spinoza, 207. 

Stade, 10, 48, 68, 89, 98, 133, 
173, 267, 270, 304 @. 

Staerk, 361. 


_~ Stairs (near Jerusalem), 185. 


. 
| 
: 
: 


A 
7 
7 
7 


yr ie ne «al 


a 
} 
4 


3 


se 
4 
’ 
= 
i 
: 





Stand, 230. 
Statutes, 163. 


_ Steuernagel, 248. 


Strack, 13. 

Straight way, a, 128. 

Straitness (distress), 333. 

Strange women, 144, 148, 149, 
152, 155, 156. 

‘Strangers = non-Jews, 220. 

Streane, 323. 

Stud, 348. 


' Stuff, household, 280. 


_ Sumer, 42. 


‘Sunrise and sunset in Felesine, 


T97- 
Sure covenant, 244.» 
Susa, 97, Iol, 120, 158, 208, 
306, 307. 
— fortress (palace) of, 169, 316. 
Susiana, 94. 
Swete, 294. 
Swords, 195. 
Syene, 161. 
Synagogue, Great, 8, 220. 
Synod of Jamnia, 3, 13. 
Syria, 169. 
Eoyiian, 39. 


INDEX 


381 


Tabeel, 85, 86. 

Tabernacles, Feast of, 5, 7, xo, 
16, 71, 73) 75) 133, 156, 158, 
218, 225. 

Tablets, Cuneiform, 91, 96, 102, 
103, 135, 168, 300. 

Talent-of gold, 130. 

— of silver, 120, 129, 327. 

Talmud, 3, 62, 199, 213. 

Taph, 144. 

Tarpelites, 88. 

Tattenai, 96, 97, 
ro8. 

Teachers, Levites as, 126. 

Tebet, or tenth month, 152, 

Tekoa, 181. 

Tel-el-Amarna, clay tablets 
found at, 91, 102, 135, 168. 
Temple, first (Solomon’s), 75, 
80; destroyed by Nebu- 

chadnezzar, 99. 

—second, Cyrus authorizes 
rebuilding of, 46; prepara- 
tions for rebuilding, 75; 
foundation laid, 76, 100; 
work hindered, 80; recom- 
menced, 105; completed, 108; 
dedicated, 109. 

— to be rebuilt to receive the 
Messiah, 94. 

—— chambers or cells in, 130. 

— contributions towards, 118. 

— doors of, 209. 

— officials of, 51, 59, 152. 

— outward business of, 258. 

—poll-tax for upkeep 
248. 

— records of, 12, 51. 

— servants of :—Nethinim, 62, 
63, 64, JI, 121, 127, 190; 
porters, 62, 63, 71, 153, 212; 
singers, 62, 63, 71, 153- 

— stones, great, of, 98. 


IOI, 105, 


of, 


Tertu, 9. 
Thackeray, 29. = 
Thanks, to give, see’ under 


_ Confession. , 


¥ - 


382 


Thenius, 173. 

Theodotian, 28, 29. 

Thermopylae and Salamis, 
battle of, 32. 

Thompson, 294. 


Thousand and One Nights, The, 


363. 

Thumb, 306. 

Tiberius, Roman Tribune, 34. 

Tiribaz, 340. 

Tirshatha, 66, 7o, 156, 224, 
245. 

Tischendorf-Nestle, 294. 

Tishri (Sacred month), 71, 75, 
152, 218. 

— first day of, 220. 

- Tithe, 18, 252. 

Titus, arch of, at Rome, 92. 

Tobiah the Ammonite, 171, 178, 
206, 207. 

Tolerance of early Persian 
kings, 15, 40, 102, 360, 362. 

Toll, go. 

Torah, or Book-of the Law, 8, 
9, 10, II, 115, 293. 

Torrey, 5 14, 16, 21, 22, 28, 40, 
54, 62, 101, I1I,- 133, 177, 
230, 246, 262, 275- 

Tower of Furnaces, 184. 

— Hammeah, 179. 

— Hananel, 180. 

Tradition, 27. 

Transgress, trespass, 144, 146, 
148, 162. 

Transpotamia, commander or 
recorder of, 86, 96. 

— governors andsatraps of, 169. 

— Judah a part of, 55. 

—— judges and magistrates in, 
12l. 

— meaning of word, 87. 

— treasury of, 119. 

Treasurer, 120. 

Treasury, I19. 

Tribe, 52. 

Tribute, 90, 92. 

Trito-Isaiah, 31. 


EZRA,. NEHEMIAH, _ 


: Trumpets blown i 


Umon Lakish, 26r. He: 







ue 
Toimpelae rest 


Tyropocon Valley, 173, 285° i 
Ubkhulgal, 235. 


Unclean land, 140. : 
Unwalled villages, 354. <s 


Upon, 270. i ; ; 
Uriah, high-priest, 181. Me 


Urim and Thummim, 67. 
UStannai, Governor of Trans- 5 


potamia, 96, 
Uzahor, 15. 


Valley Gate, 172, 184, 270. 

Valley of Craftsmen, 262. 

Vashti, 303, 310, 314. 

Verb, impersonal, see Indefinite 
Subject. 

— agreement of, 357. 

Vernes, 23, 25. f 

Verse, the longest in the  Hagio- 
grapha, 347- 4 

Vessels of banquet, 309. 

— Temple restored by Cyn, f 
46. : 

Viewed, 174. 

Virgins, 3I5. 

Virgin’s Sans (ion, 185, 

189. 


‘ 


Vitringa, 20 


‘ dais a 


Wady-el-Wad, 173. 

Wady-er-Rababi, 172, © 

Wall, sense of Hebrew word 
so rendered, 96. 

Walls, i. e. fences or wee 
tions, 140. 

Wallsof J erusilem,eastern, "71- 

— north-eastern, 178, 

— south-eastern, cee 

— cou rae : 









Pe nats? rg. TINDER 1) 


- Walls. of dernselem, western, 
178. 
— completion of and time 
occupied therewith, 210, 
_— dedication of, 268. 
— procession round, 269. 
_ — repairing of, “Hebrew word 
-explained, 193. 
_ Walton, Polyglot of, 28. 
Ward, kept the, 276. 
Warren, 177. 
Watches, 213. 
Water Gate, 188, 270. 
‘Waw consecutive’ forms, 41, 
 __ 254, 316. 
Wedding feast, 321, 
Weeks, Feast of, 10, 75. 
Wellhausen, 9; 14; 19, 26, 40, 
48, 70; 94, 96, 115, 116, 242, 
250; 254, 255: 
West, Hebrew terms for, 271. 
Westcott, 292. 
Whiston, 28. 
Whitehouse, 31, 32, 165. 
Wildeboer, 292, 299, 304, 325, 
34°, 345, 35I. 
Wilhelm, E., 361. 
Winepress (purah), 304. 
Wise men, 311. 
Wives, read ‘foreign wives,’ 145. 
Woman, low position of in the 
East, 314. 
Women, separate feast for, 310. 
— ate with men in Persia, 297, 
ar. 310, 
_ —Strange, 144, 148, 149, 152, 
 . 155, 156. 
_ — when first put away, 112. 
Wood-offering, 250. 
Worship, centralization of, 74. 
_ Wright, F. F., 172. 
_ Writing, modes of and materials 
for, 103, 168. 





_ Xenophon, qo. 
Xerxes I (Ahasuerus), extent 
of kingdom of, 306, ; 


> . ce 


383 


Xerxes I, letter sent to, 84. _ 

— name in Eeppedts and so on, 
307. 

— consults his wise men, BIT; ; 
dismisses .. Vashti, 313; 
chooses Esther, 329 ; agrees 
to. Haman’s proposa to 
slaughter the Jews, 325; 
withdraws the edict, 345 ; 
sentences Haman to death, 
3443; allows the Jews to 
slaughter their enemies, 348, 


3509. 


Yahweh, the Hebrew word, 
how represented in English, 
and so on, 162. ; 

— the national God of Israel, 
120, 162, 

yorship of by Samaritans, 
Bi. 

Yahwism, 68. 

— favour shown to by ‘early 
Persian kings, 102. 

Year, first month of, 152. 

— sacred and secular, 152. 

Yeb, Jewish Temple of Yahu 
at, 15, 32, 161, 362. 

— — spared by Cambyses, to2, 





Zabbai, or Zaccai, 154. 

Zaccur, 180. 

Zadok, 282. 

Zadokites, 62. 

Zagmuk, Feast of, 302. 

Zamzagu, 158. 

Zanoah (Zanit’a), 261,- 

Zarathustra (Zoroaster), 360, 
362. 

Zebakh, 19. 

Zeboim, 262. 

Zechariah, son of Iddo, 5, 23, 
94: 

Zeresh, 337. 

Zerubbabel, 


first governor of 


* Judah, 204. 


meaning of name, 56. 


awit “Jéahtia built the 
pei laid the eee 








i Date Due 

oe 4 
NOV 14 ‘73 
NOV 28 


DEC 19 
MARO 7 


MAY 2 1 
eg 2G 





















Demco 38-297 





| Ning 








4oco9g7l 10d 


WIM 


na 


WIL 


os 





